Confusion Over Oxygen Cap Involves More than Just Typo

Atlanta

Ivan Rodriguez, owner of IR Medical Equipment in Miami, is astounded at the hit he thinks the Deficit Reduction Act will have on his oxygen business.

“I think it will affect at least 50 percent of my business,” he said, “and maybe more.”

Like other oxygen providers across the country, Rodriguez expressed shock and concern over the controversial act. And he has many questions.

“What does this mean if, after 36 months, a patient calls and I’m not being paid? What do I do?” he asked. “What happens for patients who have already been on oxygen for that long? And, God forbid, what happens if one of my patients dies [after the equipment title transfers]? How will this affect liability? Will I be responsible?”

Such questions about how beneficiaries will receive ongoing care and services past the 36-month rental limit have mushroomed from stakeholders since President Bush signed the DRA Feb. 8.

AAHomecare pointed out the legislation does contain broad language regarding “payments for oxygen” and “maintenance and service” after the title transfer, but said it includes “no specifics.”

Compounding the confusion, while government officials say the DRA is a done deal, some on Capitol Hill have differing opinions as to whether the measure is even law. Because the Constitution dictates that each chamber pass bills in identical form, a legal debate emerged when the Senate and House approved different versions of the bill due to a clerical typo.

Last month, HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt said he is presuming the DRA is law, “and we’re moving forward on that basis.” But a federal lawsuit challenging the legality of the act has been filed by an Alabama attorney, and legal experts say others could follow.

Meanwhile, AAHomecare said it has commissioned a study to collect the exact costs of providing oxygen service.