Certification and the CMA (AAMA) Credential, Professional Identity, Uncategorized

“Registered” vs. “Certified”: A Question of Terminology

A common source of confusion within medical assisting is the question of whether medical assisting credentials with “registered” in the name are superior to medical assisting credentials with “certified” in the name.

The answer to this question is no. National medical assisting credentials with the word “registered” as part of the credential name are not of a higher level status than medical assisting credentials with “certified” in their name.

This confusion may be engendered by the fact that “registered” indicates licensed status for credentials in fields other than medical assisting.  For example, in professional nursing, a “registered nurse” is a nurse who has met state educational and testing requirements, and is licensed to practice professional nursing.

However, this is not the case in medical assisting.  A medical assistant with a credential that has “registered” in its title is not in a different or higher legal category than a medical assistant with a credential that has “certified” in its title.

In fact, CMA (AAMA) certification has rigorous college-level education requirements, physician-quality exam standards, and is nationally and globally accredited, unlike other certifications and registrations.

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Computerized Provider Order Entry (CPOE), EHR Incentive Programs, On the Job

MACRA and Order Entry Requirements

The Medicare Access and CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Program) Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) mandated that the Medicare Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Program come to an end on December 31, 2016. One of the new payment mechanisms for Medicare established by MACRA is the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS). Under the primary reporting method of MIPS, an eligible provider is not required to report to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) that medication, laboratory, and diagnostic imaging orders are being entered by credentialed medical assistants or licensed health care professionals.

CMS, however, offers eligible providers an alternate reporting method under MIPS. Under this method, providers are permitted to report on optional measures, such as computerized provide order entry (CPOE).

This issue will be addressed in greater detail in the upcoming January/February 2017 issue of CMA Today. In the meantime, all past Public Affairs articles by CEO Balasa can be found on the AAMA website

Certification and the CMA (AAMA) Credential, On the Job, Professional Identity, Scope of Practice

CMS Audits as Safeguards Against Fraudulent Order Entry

In the continuing discussion about computerized provider order entry (CPOE), a frequent question concerns whether a noncredentialed health care professional could circumvent any safeguards and perform order entry into an electronic health record (EHR) system. As Rob Antony of CMS stated last year, it is indeed possible to do this. However, that possibility is one of the primary reasons for CMS audits, which could identify and penalize such behaviors. A standard EHR system would maintain a log of which staff members enter orders. Any practice found violating the requirements for order entry could be subject to financial penalties. The full text and video of Mr. Anthony’s statement follows:

“There’s not a requirement as part of certification that your certified EHR has to identify you as [a] credentialed [medical assistant]; there’s actually not a requirement within certification that you have to be identified as anything. However, for purposes of entry, for purposes of workflow, the [eligible professional] and the practice [have] to make sure that’s who is entering that information. We realize that not every EHR may have that information, but certainly a large number of them do, and I can anticipate that an auditor would ask for that log.”

***

“We don’t actually have any additional regulatory authority beyond what we have with incentive payments and payment adjustments, specific to this program for CPOE. It is possible for anyone to game the system here. That’s why an auditor might look at credentialing and would look at those audit logs to see whether or not that was likely to have happened. The authority here, or the clout, Is either if an auditor goes through and discovers that people were erroneously counted within a numerator and you did not actually meet meaningful use, you would forfeit an incentive payment, and then potentially [it would] be applied [to] the payment adjustments. So certainly if an auditor comes by afterward and discovered that your attestation was not correct, then it would be a forfeit of payment or a recoup of payment, and potentially things that are egregious fraud get sent for additional prosecution.”

Certification and the CMA (AAMA) Credential

The Specific Nature of the “Certified Medical Assistant”

I have written previously about the importance of properly identifying medical assistants, specifically regarding instances in which they are referred to as nurses. But, some issues exist within the medical assisting profession itself.

Using the phrase “Certified Medical Assistant” or the initialism “CMA” to describe a medical assistant who has not earned a CMA (AAMA) credential from the Certifying Board of the American Association of Medical Assistants is both incorrect and a matter of intellectual property law.

You can read about this matter in further length in the attached memorandum.

[Use of “certified medical assistant” and “CMA”]

Certification and the CMA (AAMA) Credential, Scope of Practice, Uncategorized

Stage 1 and 2 Terminology

Hello again!

As the implications of the CMS Stage 2 final rule continue to unfold, more questions inevitably arise. One of these questions involves the status of “credentialed medical assistants” in the computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system with regard to Stages 1 and 2. The CMS website addresses this very question:

Q: Does the inclusion of [credentialed medical assistants] in the list of professionals who can enter orders into the EHR using CPOE and have them count in the numerator of the CPOE measure apply to Stage 1 as well as Stage 2?

A: We have revised the description of who can enter orders into the EHR and have it count as CPOE and have it count for purposes of the CPOE measure. This revision is available for EHR reporting periods in 2013 and beyond regardless of what stage of meaningful use the provider is attesting to.

I will continue to keep you updated as more questions are raised—and answered—in the wake of this important ruling.

(Source: https://questions.cms.gov/faq.php?id=5005&faqId=7693)