Region D Scrutinizing K3 Feet

From time to time I like to present additional resources for OPGA members to review. The following post is from Ossur’s R&R blog and authored by David McGill, one of the leading audit experts in the O&P profession. The full post can be found at the link below.

Posted by David McGill | July 10, 2014

In the last year MAC Region D has invested a significant amount of time reviewing claims for K3 feet – especially those using L5980 and L5981.  

Overall, the data show that claim denial rates have not materially decreased over the last 9-12 months for either code in Region D, and remain very high for both codes.

What does this mean for you?

Region D will continue to scrutinize K3 claims based on these results. The identified reasons for the denials? We’re looking once again at the usual suspects:

  • documentation doesn’t support the selected functional level;
  • inadequate documentation that the patient will reach or matain a defined functional level within a reasonable time period;
  • no corroborating information in the physician’s records;
  • inadequate proof of delivery;
  • signature requirements not met;
  • inadequate proof that replacement, as opposed to repair, was necessary;
  • no documentation that the patient is “motivated to ambulate”; and
  • the supplier failed to respond at all to Region D’s Additional Documentation Request.

How do you avoid these denials? First, make sure that you have a copy of Medicare’s Local Coverage Determination and comply with its requirements. Second, remember that Ossur has a service you can use – The Audit Team – that will ensure your claims are Medicare-compliant for a fixed fee per claim. In order to speak to The Audit Team, email them at

Region D has demonstrated that it will consistently review K3 foot claims. That won’t change until prepayment review claim denial rates fall significantly. Review the LCD, use The Audit Team, and turn the denial rate tide. MORE


This entry was posted in Orthotics and Prosthetics, Prosthetist, re provider, Regulatory and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s