In the last two months four states have proposed elimination of O&P coverage
thru Medicaid funding programs.
In this crisis, I find it odd that we are addressing aspects of
co-signatures requirements ,when they are not required in approximately 44
states but neither is a primary signature of a ABC certified practitioner to
provide these services in any of these states either,Virginia included.
Any certification is optional in all but a handful of states which are
regulated and are closely aligned to ABC guidelines.
ABC may mandate via by laws or Canons of Ethics but does not provide
oversight or disciplinary action to those ABC certifies whom may not be in
compliance and to those whom are not certified by them yet, legally able to
provide these services and receive reimbursement by third party payers.
Yes, there should be a law as there is for every other legitimate health
care profession to encourage proper coverage for patients thru qualified
However, who is going to be the driving force for such state and federal
laws via regulation?
The profession, the patient, the industry or the govt. by denying and
reducing O&P coverage thru state and federal funding programs.?
In my opinion, if the industry and profession continues to refer to the
recipients as “consumers” of these comprehensive health cares services, as
they are referred for durable medical equipment , 3rd party payers and
providers see no reason nor necessity to mandate minimum qualifications to
help provide proper coverage.
—– Original Message —–
From: “Joan K. Cestaro, CP”
Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 9:56 AM
Subject: [OANDP-L] Replies to co-signature
> Thanks to those quick replies. It appears that co-signatures are
> mandated by ABC for accreditation. Some states have licensures that
> also mandate this- mine is not one of them. This does NOT seem to be a
> federal or government law or part of any compliance program…as of yet!
> Joan K. Cestaro, C.P.
> RPI- Virginia