OIG: Hospital's NPs Fell Under 'Safe Harbor' Provision of Anti-Kickback Statute
This advisory opinion addressed a proposed arrangement by the hospital under which the hospital employs NPs to assist participating physicians and allows these NPs to perform a wide range of tasks and services that were traditionally only performed by physicians.
February 23, 2023 at 11:04 AM
8 minute read
On Dec. 14, 2022, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued Advisory Opinion No. 22-20 that addresses a request from an acute-care hospital, that provides a range of inpatient and outpatient hospital-based services. The hospital sought to determine whether its arrangement to utilize hospital's nurse practitioners (NPs) in providing Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries with services that were previously only performed by participating physicians in certain units within one of the hospital's two campuses (the arrangement) may trigger the imposition of sanctions for potential violations under the federal anti-kickback statute (AKS) or the civil monetary penalties law (CMP) of the Social Security Act (the act).
Based on the facts submitted by the inquiring hospital the OIG concluded that the proposed arrangement would not be in violation of the AKS or the CMP and would fall under the safe harbor provisions of the act. The opinion stipulates that it is limited in scope and application and may not be relied upon by other persons. Nevertheless, it may have a significant favorable impact on the health care industry, especially for many underserved areas of the country with considerable deficiency in numbers of doctors, as the opinion may serve as a guide for hospitals to expand their services under certain circumstances and provide more comprehensive care to beneficiaries of federal health care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. The advisory opinion can be accessed on the OIG's website at www.oig.hhs.gov in the advisory opinion page of the compliance section.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLongtime Reed Smith Health Care Partner Opts for Solo Practice Over Retirement
3 minute readHospital Must Provide Pre-Complaint Discovery in Privacy Breach Case, Pa. Judge Rules
4 minute readJudge Approves $25M Medical Monitoring Settlement Over Philips CPAP Devices
3 minute readThe Essential Role of Partnership Agreements in Health Care Private Practices
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250