In office pathology labs

Discussion in 'CBL' started by Anonymous, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:19 PM.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Anybody who is considering building an in-office lab should have their head examined. Why would anybody consider developing an in-office lab and incurring the cost of construction and equipment as well as the ongoing expenses and hassle of operating an in-office lab?

    For anyone considering an in-office lab it makes more sense to enter into client bill arrangements in those states, in which it is permissible. Slides can be purchased for significantly less than the cost to produce within an in-office lab and furthermore the practice does not have to assume the liability that comes with slide production in their office. TCPC also remains a viable model of ancillary revenue and enhanced patient care.

    Laboratory Development Companies (IOP) are lying to their existing and prospective clients. They know very well that the CMS reimbursement cuts are only the beginning of the story. Many insurance contracts are already linked to the Medicare fee schedule. When in the history of medicine have private payors not followed Medicare’s lead? Sooner rather than later the cuts will extend to all payors. Many payors already have stopped reimbursing for TC and global in-office pathology, such as Florida Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Furthermore they advocate possible illegal billing arrangements, forcing the pathologists to participate in reimbursement models at far below market rates.

    In addition, office based labs have other hurdles to overcome such as CAP accreditation in order to receive Aetna reimbursements as of April 1, 2013.
    For any physician(s) considering building an in-office lab the effect will be like investing in Lucent stock or selling ice cubes to Eskimos-“That time has also passed” !!
     

  2. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    I love seeing the old college try.Your company has already fell over the fiscal cliff