Research Doesn’t Pay—At Least Not in Graduate Medical Education


Monday the Seventh Circuit upheld the position of CMS that “pure research” by medical residents doesn’t count in the calculation of costs for graduate medical education reimbursement.

Indirect graduate medical costs, or IGME, are what Medicare allows teaching hospitals in increased Medicare rates. IGME represents the indirect costs to a teaching hospital of hosting residents and interns—costs above and beyond the direct cost of their salaries and benefits, or DGME.

Medicare divides such research into two categories:  patient care-related research and research that isn’t patient care-related. This decision concerned the latter—what the court termed “pure research.” The question was whether for the years in question, 1983 to 2001—more on that later—Rush Medical Center could count that cost in IGME. If it could, then the count of its full-time equivalent residents would increase as much as 19 a year. That represents a lot of money.

The period in question ended in 2001 because in the Affordable Care Act of 2010 Congress said explicitly that from 2001 forward pure research costs could not be included in IGME. That same year—2010—HHS issued a regulation announcing that the same principle applied for the years from 1983 to 2001.

Rush challenged the validity of the regulation based on an earlier Seventh Circuit decision involving University of Chicago Hospital. In that case the court had allowed pure research costs.

The court ruled against Rush, deciding that the University of Chicago decision was different because it was announced before HHS had issued the regulation directly on point. The court found no grounds for finding that the regulation exceeded the authority of HHS under the statute. So Rush lost the case and wasn’t allowed to include pure research costs in its IGME for the years 1983 to 2001.

But, putting aside the substantive issue, what kind of system tolerates allowing accounting issues from 1983 to linger into the second half of 2014? Why isn’t that the big story here?

Written by:

Published In:

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Faegre Baker Daniels | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.