From this thread:KansasRT wrote:I would agree with giving patients an apap to begin with, but not always having it be set as an apap. I am not convinced that everyone needs apap settings. But I do agree that having that technology available would be benefical. I do not agree with a DME company billing an insurance company for a cpap and providing an apap and making the patient pay the difference. The billing code is the same for both machines, but you still have to provide the insurance a description of the equipment. Not giving the appropriate description to an insurance company is not a practice I would feel comfortable doing. Also, if you are a contracting provider with an insurance company it is a touchy issue in billing a patient for something that technically should be covered by insurance. How I handle this situation is we would provide a patient with an apap and bill the insurance for an apap. Most generally they will not cover it, but will reimburse for a cpap. I would be responsible for writing off the difference, not billing the patient. Until I was on this site, I had never heard of billing a patient the extra for an apap. $200 seems like alot to me for the difference anyway. I guess I have different view of things.
viewtopic.php?p=135852#135852
What I wonder is if we'll eventually see the manufacturers phase out the dumber machines in favor of the smarter machines. If the ultimate goal is compliance, it seems to me providing an APAP with exhalation relief right off the bat makes a lot of sense. I think it is very unfortunate a patient has to battle for an APAP and is forced to suffer through proving intolerance to CPAP before he/she can get one. My guess is that's the point where we lose half the people prescribed this therapy.