National Academies Press: OpenBook

Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future (2000)

Chapter: Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts

« Previous: Appendix A: Acknowledgments
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×

APPENDIX B
Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts

Katie Merrell

Center for Health Administration Studies, University of Chicago

Under current policy, Medicare payments for ambulatory clinical laboratory services are based on 56 regional fee schedules, subject to a service-specific national limit. Each regional fee schedule is based on charges in 1984, subject to a series of annual reductions and updates since then. The median of these updated base payment rates is calculated for each service to establish the National Limitation Amount (NLA), which is currently set at 74 percent of the median. Actual payment for a particular service in a particular area is then equal to the lesser of the regional base rate and the NLA. This appendix explores the relationships among regional fee schedules, the NLA, and actual payment amounts. By comparing current laboratory payments to the NLA, it provides estimates of the financial implications of an NLA-based national fee schedule.

In 2000, nearly 84 percent of payment amounts (at the region service level) were set at the NLA.1 This suggests that there is effectively a national fee schedule, where relative service payments are determined by the relationship between median charges in 1984 across the carriers, coupled with gap-filled and cross-walked values for codes established since then.2

Analysis of 2000 payment rates reveals that the high prevalence of the NLA in determining payments suppresses the variation in payment amounts across carriers. More than 16 percent of updated base amounts are at least 25 percent less than the median base amount, while more than 21 percent exceed the

1  

The 2000 fee schedules were downloaded from the Health Care Financing Administration’s (HCFA) Web page (http://www.hcfa.gov/stats/pufiles.htm) in February 2000.

2  

Gap-filling and cross-walking are two techniques used by HCFA and its carriers to develop fee schedule values for new services.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×

FIGURE B.1 Medicare laboratory fee schedules FY 2000 updated base amounts compared to median base amounts.

median by at least 25 percent (Figure B.1). In other words, nearly 40 percent of the values in carrier fee schedules differ by more than 25 percent from the relevant service median value. Those that fall well below the median will be paid at rates below the NLA, while all of those above 74 percent of the median will be paid at the NLA, reducing the effective geographic differences in payments. The NLA is set at 74 percent of the median, so only 16 percent of service payment amounts are less than the NLA. The base rates, however, exhibit geographic variation not reflected in actual payments. For some, such as non-automated urinalysis (CPT 81000), base amounts are tightly clustered across the regional fee schedules (coefficient of variation = 16 percent), while, for others, such as HIV-1 (CPT 87536), there is considerable spread in base rates (coefficient of variation = 67 percent) (Table B.1). With the exception of the HIV-1 test listed, payment for 20 services studied, which include high-volume Medicare services and others of particular policy interest, is set at the NLA in at least 80 percent of carriers; for three services (digoxin assay, parathormone assay, and Pap cytopathology thin layer preparation), all payments are at the NLA.

The NLA is based on an unweighted median of regional fee schedule amounts. As a result, it is not the median value of actual payments for each service since service volumes vary across regions. The median value of actual lab payments for a particular service may be much higher (or lower) than the median used to set the NLA. A simple three-region, three-service example illustrates this (Table B.2).

In this example, all fee schedule values in Regions 2 and 3 exceed the NLA, so all payments in these two regions would be set at the NLA. In Region 1, payments for Services A and B would be set at the regional fee schedule amount while payment for Service C would be capped at the NLA. Overall, 77 percent of payment amounts at the region service level in this hypothetical system would be at the NLA.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×

TABLE B.1 National Limits and Updated Carrier Base Rates, Selected Laboratory Services

 

 

National Limitation Amount (NLA)

Summary of Updated Carrier Base Rates, 2000

HCPCS

Brief Description

NLA ($)

% Carrier Payment Amounts @ NLA

Median ($)

Mean ($)

Min ($)

Max ($)

Std. Dev. ($)

Coefficient of Variation

80049

Metabolic panel

11.29

80.36

15.26

16.14

6.34

41.04

5.81

36

80054

Comprehensive metabolic panel

14.61

82.14

19.74

20.45

11.61

33.15

5.57

27

80162

Assay of digoxin

18.35

100.00

24.80

26.15

19.82

48.23

4.80

18

81000

Urinalysis nonauto w/scope

4.37

94.64

5.91

6.11

3.53

8.83

1.00

16

82607

Vitamin B-12

20.83

89.29

28.15

28.75

14.40

77.15

8.81

31

82728

Assay of ferritin

18.83

96.43

25.44

27.13

12.09

49.76

6.31

23

82947

Assay of glucose

5.42

94.64

7.33

7.57

5.18

13.14

1.55

20

83036

Glycated hemoglobin test

13.42

89.29

18.13

18.60

9.66

40.12

5.17

28

83718

Assay of lipoprotein

11.31

91.07

15.29

15.85

7.97

39.47

5.33

34

83970

Assay of parathormone

57.04

100.00

77.08

81.58

57.21

174.87

19.32

24

84154

Assay of PSA free

25.42

94.64

34.35

38.15

20.06

75.64

12.29

32

84443

Assay TSH

23.21

91.07

31.37

31.84

21.74

63.62

6.72

21

85024

Automated hemogram

11.70

76.79

15.81

15.13

8.54

29.69

4.52

30

85025

Automated hemogram

10.74

85.71

14.52

15.03

6.43

29.69

4.45

30

85610

Prothrombin time

5.43

94.64

7.34

7.55

4.39

13.21

1.35

18

86316

Immunoassay

28.76

87.50

38.86

41.53

13.66

104.91

15.60

38

87086

Urine culture/colony count

11.16

89.29

15.08

14.68

5.18

25.08

3.39

23

87536

HIV-1

117.59

76.79

158.91

207.69

67.75

872.10

138.90

67

88142

Cytopathology

0.00

100.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

88164

Cytopathology TBS

7.15

92.86

9.66

9.61

5.00

14.40

1.96

20

NOTE: Coefficient of variation expresses the standard deviation as a percentage of the mean. Std. Dev. = standard deviation; PSA = prostate specific antigen; TSH = thyroid stimulating hormone; HIV = human immunodeficiency virus; TBS = the Bethesda System.

SOURCE: Analysis of Carrier Fee Schedules and Pricing Amounts for 2000, as reported on the Health Care Financing Administration’s Web page.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×

TABLE B.2 Illustrative Regional Fee Schedules and National Limitation Amounts

 

Region 1

Region 2

Region 3

Median

NLA

Service A

$13

$25

$18

$18

$13.32

Service B

$10

$19

$16

$16

$11.84

Service C

$2.60

$3

$3

$3

$2.22

NOTE: The NLA is 74 percent of the median of the regional fee schedule values.

TABLE B.3 Service Volumes

 

Region 1

Region 2

Region 3

Service A

100

1,500

1,000

Service B

500

4,500

4,000

Service C

1,000

5,000

4,000

This is not a particularly helpful number, however, because service volumes vary across services and regions. Service C is at the NLA in all three areas, so if it is a high-volume service, the actual number of payments at the NLA would be greater than 77 percent. Similarly, payments in Regions 2 and 3 are all at the NLA, so if they account for more than two-thirds of service volume, the actual number of services paid at the NLA would exceed 77 percent.

Given service volumes, in fact, it would be possible to figure out exactly what percentage of services are paid at the NLA, what share of total spending is at the NLA, and how much more money would be required to pay for all services at the NLA. Based on a set of volumes for the hypothetical system described above (Table B.3), these various measures can be calculated. The resulting estimates indicate the financial implications of an NLA-based fee schedule.

These service volumes imply that, in the hypothetical system, more than 97 percent of service payments would be at the NLA, compared to only 77 percent of regional payment amounts. The share of spending at the NLA would be almost 1 percent lower, because Services A and B, which are not at the NLA in Region 1, account for relatively more spending than volume. In this example, total spending is about 99.4 percent of what it would be if all services were paid at the NLA.3

In the case of actual Medicare payments, the simple fact that 84 percent of carrier payment amounts are set at Medicare’s NLA does not provide a very accurate estimate of how close current payments are to an NLA-based fee schedule. First, even those services not paid at the NLA may be paid very close to the

3  

Multiplying the payment amounts (the lesser of the fee schedule amount or NLA) in Table B.2 by the volumes in Table B.3 suggests that total spending in this system was $162,440. Multiplying the volumes in Table B.3 by the NLA in Table B.2 shows that if all services were paid at the NLA, then total payments would be $163,392.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×

NLA. In fact, payment levels not at the NLA average 75 percent of the NLA, across services and carriers. Second, since volumes vary across services and regions, payments for the actual mix of services used by beneficiaries may be closer to (or farther from) the NLA. The ideal way to get a more accurate estimate of how actual payments relate to the NLA would be to use data on service volumes within each carrier to repeat the calculations illustrated above. Unfortunately, reliable service volume data are unavailable at the code-carrier level.

Reasonable estimates can be made, however, based on available data, namely, the distribution of beneficiaries across carriers and of total payments for each lab code. The number of fee-for-service beneficiaries in each carrier area can be used to get some sense of the distribution of service volumes for each code across carriers, although this approach ignores any important regional variation in per capita service use across services.4 With this distribution, a weighted mean of regional payment amounts can be calculated, which can then be compared with the NLA. The resulting “NLA ratio” tells, in essence, how the mean payment for that service relates to the NLA. In turn, the mean of this service-level NLA ratio, weighted by total spending for each service, would reveal how close total spending is to what would occur under the NLA.

The modified calculation is perhaps most easily illustrated by revisiting the calculations in the above example. Instead of service volumes (Table B.3), imagine that only the distribution of beneficiaries across the three areas and the total spending for each service are available (Table B.4).

A slightly different approach is required to calculate measures such as those reported earlier in the absence of service volumes. First, the distribution of beneficiaries can be used to calculate a service-specific, population-weighted payment amount across the three regions (Table B.5).

The ratio of this amount to the NLA can then be calculated (Table B.5). Finally, the mean of this ratio, weighted by the distribution of total spending (Table B.4), can be calculated. The estimate of 0.992 corresponds well to the earlier estimate that spending was about 99.4 percent of what would occur under the NLA. This alternative approach, although somewhat complicated, appears to allow for developing reasonable estimates without the benefit of service volumes but with the data that are available.

This second approach—population-weighted service-level payment amounts, NLA ratio, and service-level spending-weighted mean of the NLA ratio—can be used with available Medicare data. The distribution of fee-for-service Medicare

4  

The appropriateness of using beneficiary counts to summarize payment amounts across carriers was explored through analysis of a subset of services for which credible total volume data were available. For these services, an average payment amount can be calculated by dividing total spending by total service volumes. For this subset of services, the average payment amount was typically within pennies of the beneficiary-weighted average of carrier payment amounts and never differed by more than about 8 percent. This suggests that the use of beneficiary counts to develop service-level payment amounts is appropriate.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×

beneficiaries across counties is available from the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) and can be mapped into the 56 regions underlying the lab fee schedules. Total charge data are available for the 100 codes that accounted for the largest majority of Medicare outpatient lab spending in 1998.5 Combined, these codes accounted for more than 83 percent of spending, so an analysis of them should be fairly suggestive.6

For these top codes, the unweighted service-level NLA ratio across the 56 fee schedules is about 0.98 (compared to about 0.96 for all codes), suggesting that among high-cost or high-volume services, the fee schedule amount is closer to the NLA than for other services. The charge-weighted mean NLA ratio for these services is 0.985, so that across all payments, service payments are about 98.5 percent of the NLA.7

TABLE B.4 Population by Region and Spending by Service

 

Region 1

Region 2

Region 3

Total Spending

Service A

 

 

 

$34,600

Service B

 

 

 

$105,640

Service C

 

 

 

$22,200

% beneficiaries

7

51

42

 

TABLE B.5 Service Payments and NLA Ratio

Population-Weighted

Payment Amount

NLA

Ratio: Weighted Payment Amount to NLA

Service A

$13.30

$13.32

0.998

Service B

$11.70

$11.84

0.988

Service C

$2.22

$2.22

1.000

NOTE: The population-weighted payment amount is calculated from the payment amounts in Table B.2 (minimum of fee schedule amount and NLA) and the population distribution in Table B.4.

5  

This analysis is based on 1998 fee schedules, as downloaded from HCFA’s Web page (http://www.hcfa.gov/stats/pufiles.htm) in June 2000, to match the year for which spending data are available.

6  

Several carriers were omitted from this analysis because of problems matching with data on beneficiary counts used for weighting. Similarly, coding discrepancies between data sources limited analyses of the 100 codes with the highest allowed charges to 92 codes. These omissions are unlikely to have important implications for the simple analyses described here.

7  

There is a slight error in this estimate because the total spending weight reflects actual payment levels rather than the NLA. The high correlation between the NLA and the calculated service payment amounts suggests that this error is inconsequential, particularly because spending is used as a weight and not as a measure of absolute levels.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×

One way to interpret these results is to use them to anticipate the implications of an NLA-based fee schedule. Based on these estimates, an across-the-board NLA reduction of about 1.5 percent would be necessary to create a budget-neutral lab fee schedule based on current NLAs. Conversely, Medicare outpatient lab spending would increase about 1.5 percent if all payments were raised to the NLA.

This estimate is based only on those high-cost or high-volume services that account for most of Medicare spending. The unweighted estimate for all services implies that a reduction of about 4 percent would be necessary, but this is an upper bound that is likely to dramatically overstate the correct amount. Although 1.5 percent is a lower bound, the correct adjustment will lie much closer to 1.5 than to 4 percent, because of the large share of spending accounted for by the services studied. More accurate estimates could be calculated easily from data on total spending for all codes or, better still, service volumes for each code in each region. The present estimates, however, provide fairly strong evidence that Medicare’s present payment policy is, in effect, an NLA-based fee schedule.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×
Page 177
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×
Page 178
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×
Page 179
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×
Page 180
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×
Page 181
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×
Page 182
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Medicare Clinical Laboratory Payments: The National Limitation Amount and Its Relationship to Payment Amounts." Institute of Medicine. 2000. Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9997.
×
Page 183
Next: Appendix C: Study of Fees and Payment System Characteristics for Clinical Laboratory Services »
Medicare Laboratory Payment Policy: Now and in the Future Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $55.00 Buy Ebook | $43.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Clinical laboratory tests play an integral role in helping physicians diagnose and treat patients. New developments in laboratory technology offer the prospect of improvements in diagnosis and care, but will place an increased burden on the payment system.

Medicare, the federal program providing coverage of health-care services for the elderly and disabled, is the largest payer of clinical laboratory services. Originally designed in the early 1980s, Medicare's payment policy methodology for outpatient laboratory services has not evolved to take into account technology, market, and regulatory changes, and is now outdated. This report examines the current Medicare payment methodology for outpatient clinical laboratory services in the context of environmental and technological trends, evaluates payment policy alternatives, and makes recommendations to improve the system.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!