Laboratory Billing
The laboratory billing process is the interaction between a clinical lab or pathology group and the insurance company (payer). The entirety of this laboratory billing interaction is known as the billing cycle, which can take anywhere from several days to several months to complete, and require several interactions before a resolution is reached. The entire process is the function of what is commonly known as the laboratory coding/billing/collections department.
Laboratory billing starts with laboratory coding. After a lab service is provided, diagnosis and procedure codes are assigned. These codes assist the insurance company in determining coverage and medical necessity of the services. The codes used for laboratory billing are the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, usually called by the short-form name International Classification of Diseases (ICD), and the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes.
The ICD is the international “standard diagnostic tool for epidemiology, health management and clinical purposes.” The current version is ICD-9, with ICD 10 scheduled to become the new standard on Oct. 15, 2015. It is maintained by the World Health Organization, the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations System.
The ICD is designed as a health care classification system, providing a system of diagnostic codes for classifying diseases, including nuanced classifications of a wide variety of signs, symptoms, abnormal findings, complaints, social circumstances, and external causes of injury or disease.
The CPT code set is a medical code set maintained by the American Medical Association through the CPT Editorial Panel. The CPT (copyright protected by the AMA) describes medical, surgical, and diagnostic services and is designed to communicate uniform information about medical services and procedures among physicians, coders, patients, accreditation organizations, and payers for administrative, financial, and analytical purposes.
Once the procedure and diagnosis codes are determined, the lab bill enters the laboratory collections/revenue cycle management phase. The payer is usually billed electronically by formatting the claim as an ANSI 837 file and using Electronic Data Interchange to submit the claim file to the payer directly or via a clearinghouse. The payer processes the claims usually by medical claims examiners or medical claims adjusters. For higher dollar amount claims, the insurance company has medical directors review the claims and evaluate their validity for payment using rubrics (procedure) for patient eligibility, provider credentials, and medical necessity.
Approved claims are reimbursed for a certain percentage of the billed services. These rates are pre-negotiated between the health care provider and the insurance company. Failed claims are denied or rejected and notice is sent to provider. Most commonly, denied or rejected claims are returned to providers in the form of Explanation of Benefits (EOB) or Electronic Remittance Advice.
Upon receiving the denial message the provider must decipher the message, reconcile it with the original claim, make required corrections and resubmit the claim. This exchange of claims and denials may be repeated multiple times until a claim is paid in full, or the provider relents and accepts an incomplete reimbursement.
Two Largest Payers Start Lab Test Pre-Authorization
CEO SUMMARY: Once Anthem and UnitedHealthcare establish their respective genetic test prior-authorization programs, a new era for genetic testing will commence. The 80 million beneficiaries served by these two payers make up half of the individuals who have private health insurance. It is…
Estimating Total Costs When Genetic Tests Must Be Retested
INVITAE, A GENETIC TESTING COMPANY IN San Francisco, has begun a retest program involving 50,000 patients. Such a large retest effort is without precedent in the still-nascent genetic testing marketplace. Clinical laboratories and genetic testing companies commonly find that, in dai…
NILA Asks Labs to Speak about PAMA Rule’s Flaws
CEO SUMMARY: In a call to action, the National Independent Laboratory Association is urging lab owners, lab managers, and pathologists to educate their members of Congress about the biases and deep flaws built into the final rule for PAMA market price reporting and how the rule will resul…
Delay and Fix Is Message From Labs to Congress
CEO SUMMARY: Only a few months remain before the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services makes deep price cuts to Medicare Part B clinical laboratory test fees. Before those cuts go into effect, lab associations and lab professionals are educating members of Congress and the ne…
LabCorp, Quest Talk about Medicare Lab Price Cuts
CEO SUMMARY: In an effort to forestall CMS’ efforts to implement the PAMA final rule on market price reporting, Laboratory Corporation of America and Quest Diagnostics are meeting with members of Congress, officials in the administration, and the new leadership of CMS. During recent con…
Hospital Lab Data Essential For CMS Market Price Study
CEO SUMMARY: In five months, Medicare officials will implement a new Part B clinical laboratory fee schedule based on private payer lab price data submitted by certain medical laboratories required to report that data. At this year’s Executive War College, the CEO of XIFIN, Inc., reported o…
Labs Ask: Does PAMA Statute Prevent Legal Challenges?
SINCE MEDICARE OFFICIALS PUBLISHED the final rule for lab test market price reporting of private payer prices last year, clinical lab industry consultants and lawyers have raised serious criticisms of the rule. The critics recognized that CMS officials wrote a final rule for the Protecting Access to…
Another Pharmacogenomic Lab Hit With Audit, Multi-million Dollar Repayment Demand
CEO SUMMARY: In 2014, during a ZPIC audit of an unnamed pharmacogenomic testing lab, a federal auditor reviewed a small number of claims that had been filed over a period of several years. Despite supporting letters from physicians, the auditor rejected those claims, then extrapolated the…
NJ Lab Sues to Challenge Payers About Its Out-of-Network Status
ONE WAY THAT A CLINICAL LAB can fight back against insurers who refuse to pay lab test claims is to sue them. That’s exactly what Medical Diagnostic Laboratories of Hamilton, N.J. is doing! Not only has MDL filed lawsuits against two major health insurance companies, but in one la…
$26 Million Recoupment from Medicare Audit Hammers Pharmacogenomic Lab
CEO SUMMARY: After Pharmacogenetics Diagnostic Laboratory LLC was audited by a Medicare Zone Program Integrity Contractor (ZPIC), it faced a $26 million repayment demand. The lab company appealed and asked for a redetermination, then filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. These devel…
CURRENT ISSUE
Volume XXXII, No. 6 – April 21, 2025
Now that a federal judge has vacated the FDA’s LDT rule, The Dark Report analyzes the judgement and notes the various steps the FDA could take in response. Also, lab testing at pharmacies is proving to be less successful than was once anticipated.
See the full table of contentsHow Much Laboratory Business Intelligence Have You Missed?
Lab leaders rely on THE DARK REPORT for actionable intelligence on important developments in the business of laboratory testing. Maximize the money you make-and the money you keep! Best of all, it is released every three weeks!
Sign up for TDR Insider
Join the Dark Intelligence Group FREE and get TDR Insider FREE!
Never miss a single update on the issues that matter to you and your business.