CMS Final Rule Supports Medical Assistants Performing Nasopharyngeal Swabbing

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) published an interim final rule with comment period entitled “Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Policy and Regulatory Revisions in Response to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency” (85 FR 19247 through 19253) in the April 6, 2020, Federal Register. Its language supports my legal position that medical assistants are permitted to perform nasopharyngeal swabbing to test for COVID-19.

Note the following excerpts from this CMS rule:

Even if the patient is confined to the home because of a suspected diagnosis of an infectious disease as part of a pandemic event … a nasal or throat culture … could be obtained by an appropriately-trained [sic] medical assistant or laboratory technician. …

… Services furnished by auxiliary personnel (such as nurses, medical assistants, or other clinical personnel acting under the supervision of the [rural health clinic] or [federally qualified health center] practitioner) are considered to be incident to the visit and are included in the per-visit payment.

Is Medical Assisting Governed by State Law or Federal Law?

Like most other health professions, medical assisting is governed primarily by state law. This is due to the wording of the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Because the power to regulate professions and occupations is not delegated to the United States Congress in Article I of the Constitution, it remains within the sovereign authority of each state. This authority includes establishing education and credentialing prerequisites for the practice of a profession, delineating legal and ethical responsibilities for the professionals, and issuing and enforcing disciplinary standards for breaches of these responsibilities.

Therefore, the legal scope of practice of medical assistants (which is coterminous with the legal authority of licensed health care providers to delegate to medical assistants) is established by state legislation, regulations and policies of state boards that regulate health professionals who delegate to medical assistants, and common law principles arising from court decisions and usual and customary practice. Federal law, however, sometimes impacts medical assisting scope of practice. The meaningful use regulations of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) are a current and significant example. Federal statute and CMS rule require a certain percentage of medication/prescription, laboratory, and diagnostic imaging orders to be entered into the computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system by licensed health care professionals or “credentialed medical assistants” in order for a licensed eligible professional to receive incentive payments under the Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program.

AAMA Submits Comments on Stage 3 Final Rule

In its efforts to stay abreast of state and federal laws pertaining to the medical assisting profession, the AAMA recently submitted comments to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services regarding some specific language from the October 16, 2015 Federal Register. What follows are those comments.

…

The following comments are being submitted on behalf of the American Association of Medical Assistants (AAMA), the national organization representing the medical assisting profession at the federal and state levels.

There appears to be an accidental inconsistency between the following language on page 62944 of the final rule, and the following language on pages 62949 and 62950 of the final rule:

Page 62944, third column:

(3) Computerized provider order entry. (i) Objective. Use computerized provider order entry for medication, laboratory, and radiology orders directly entered by any licensed healthcare professional who can enter orders into the medical record per state, local, and professional guidelines.

Page 62949, third column, and page 62950, first column:

(4) Computerized provider order entry (CPOE).—(i) EP CPOE—(A) Objective. Use computerized provider order entry (CPOE) for medication, laboratory, and diagnostic imaging orders directly entered by any licensed healthcare professional, credentialed medical assistant, or a medical staff member credentialed to and performing the equivalent duties of a credentialed medical assistant, who can enter orders into the medical record per state, local, and professional guidelines. …

(ii) Eligible hospital and CAH CPOE—(A) Objective. Use computerized provider order entry (CPOE) for medication, laboratory, and diagnostic imaging orders directly entered by any licensed healthcare professional, credentialed medical assistant, or a medical staff member credentialed to and performing the equivalent duties of a credentialed medical assistant; who can enter orders into the medical record per state, local, and professional guidelines.

The American Association of Medical Assistants believes that there is an inconsistency between the above excerpts because of the following language in the analysis of, and responses to, public comments:

Page 62798, second column:

Response: In the Stage 2 final rule (77 FR 53986) and in subsequent guidance in FAQ 9058,6 we explained for Stage 2 that a licensed health care provider or a medical staff person who is a credentialed medical assistant or is credentialed to and performs the duties equivalent to a credentialed medical assistant may enter orders. We maintain our position that medical staff must have at least a certain level of medical training in order to execute the related CDS for a CPOE order entry. We defer to the provider to determine the proper credentialing, training, and duties of the medical staff entering the orders as long as they fit within the guidelines we have proscribed. We believe that interns who have completed their medical training and are working toward appropriate licensure would fit within this definition. We maintain our position that, in general, scribes are not included as medical staff that may enter orders for purposes of the CPOE objective.

However, we note that this policy is not specific to a job title but to the appropriate medical training, knowledge, and experience.

Page 62839, first column:

Response: As noted in the Stage 3 proposed rule (80 FR 16751), we require that the person entering the orders be a licensed health care professional or credentialed medical assistant (or staff member credentialed to the equivalency and performing the duties equivalent to a medical assistant). We defer to the provider’s discretion to determine the appropriateness of the credentialing of staff to ensure that any staff entering orders have the clinical training and knowledge required to enter orders for CPOE.

The American Association of Medical Assistants therefore recommends that the above language on page 62944, third column, be expanded to include “credentialed medical assistants,” as do the above excerpts from page 62949, third column, and page 62950, first column.

CMS Final Rule Reaffirms Credentialing Requirement for Medical Assistants

On October 6, 2015, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued its final rule for the Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs. In responding to comments urging that the “credentialed medical assistant” requirement be made less stringent, CMS reaffirmed that medical assistants must have a third-party credential (such as the CMA (AAMA)), and must have sufficient knowledge to handle properly clinical decision support (CDS) alerts.

One party commenting on the CMS notice of proposed rulemaking for the EHR Incentive Programs made the suggestion “that if a standard for medical assistant CPOE [computerized provider order entry] is required, then the standard should be that the medical assistant must be appropriately trained for CEHRT [certified electronic health record technology] use (including CPOE) by the employer or CEHRT vendor in order to be counted [toward meeting the meaningful use requirements of the Incentive Programs].” (page 322 of the attached document)

CMS responded as follows:

We [CMS] disagree that the training on the use of CEHRT is adequate for the purposes of entering an order under CPOE and executing any relevant action related to a CDS. We believe CPOE and CDS duties should be considered clinical in nature, not clerical.  Therefore, CPOE and CDS duties, as noted, should be viewed in the same category as any other clinical task, which may only be performed by a qualified medical or clinical staff. (page 323 of the attached document)

This position of CMS is a resounding affirmation of the fact that only professionally-credentialed medical assistants (such as CMAs (AAMA)) are qualified to enter orders safely into the CPOE system.

More information about the CMS final rule will be forthcoming in Legal Eye: On Medical Assisting and CMA Today.

CMS Final Rule (10/6/15), pages 322-323

CMS NPRM Expands Category of Radiology Orders, Thresholds

As a follow-up to my post yesterday, the March 20, 2015, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for Stage 3 of the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs has expanded the category of radiology orders to include diagnostic imaging other than radiology.  Also, the thresholds for medication, laboratory, and diagnostic imaging orders have been increased for Stage 3.  Note the following excerpts from the CMS NPRM:

We propose to continue our policy from the Stage 2 final rule that the orders to be included in this objective are medication, laboratory, and radiology orders, as such orders are commonly included in CPOE implementation and offer opportunity to maximize efficiencies for providers. However, for Stage 3, we are proposing to expand the objective to include diagnostic imaging, which is a broader category including other imaging tests such as ultrasound, magnetic resonance, and computed tomography in addition to traditional radiology. This change addresses the needs of specialists and allows for a wider variety of clinical orders relevant to particular specialists to be included for purposes of measurement.

Based on our review of attestation data from Stages 1 and 2 demonstrating provider performance on the CPOE measures, we propose to increase the threshold for medication orders to 80 percent and to increase the threshold for diagnostic imaging orders and laboratory orders to 60 percent.