LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement/Oops! CMS Data Integrity Questioned
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

Oops! CMS Data Integrity Questioned

September 5, 2014 1 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

Oops! CMS Data Integrity Questioned
Source: Wikimedia Commons and U.S. National Archives
Secondary

One third of the records will be withheld when the federal government publishes data about payments to physicians from pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, according to Charles Ornstein, writing for ProPublica. The reason? Data inconsistencies.

The problem came to light when officials of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) looked into a physician’s complaint that payments were being charged to him when they had been made to another physician with the same name. When the agency looked into the problem it found “intermingled data” which meant that doctors were being linked to medical identification numbers that were in error.

Ornstein quoted, CMS spokesman Aaron Albright who said, “CMS is returning about one-third of submitted records to the manufacturers and group purchasing organizations because of intermingled data, and will include these records in the next reporting cycle. These records won’t be posted until June 2015.” The number of records could be in the millions.

“CMS takes data integrity very seriously and took swift action after a physician reported a problem, ” said Shantanu Agrawal, M.D., CMS Deputy Administrator and Director of the Center for Program Integrity, in a written statement. “We have identified the root cause of the problem and have instituted a system fix to prevent similar errors, ” Ornstein reported.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy