146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12426531)
1. Practice management: update on coding, ancillary services, and the new Stark laws.
Beach WR; Bert JM; Friedman MM; Glaser D
Arthroscopy; 2002; 18(9 Suppl 2):53-69. PubMed ID: 12426531
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Physician refer thyself: is Stark II, phase III the final voyage?
Manchikanti L; McMahon EB
Pain Physician; 2007 Nov; 10(6):725-41. PubMed ID: 17987094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Legal issues affecting ancillaries and orthopedic practice.
Glaser DM
Orthop Clin North Am; 2008 Jan; 39(1):89-102, vii. PubMed ID: 18061773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. CMS issues final Phase III Regulations--significant impact on physician-hospital and physician-driven relationships.
Becker S; Lundeen R; Heinze G
Health Care Law Mon; 2007 Dec; 2007(12):2-19. PubMed ID: 18277700
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Exceptions to the Stark law: practical considerations for surgeons.
Satiani B
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2006 Mar; 117(3):1012-22; discussion 1023. PubMed ID: 16525301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Regulation of ancillary services.
Glaser DM
Clin Sports Med; 2002 Apr; 21(2):305-19. PubMed ID: 12122841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The Stark laws: conquering physician conflicts of interest?
Klein JE
Georgetown Law J; 1998 Nov; 87(2):499-529. PubMed ID: 10346702
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. A review of the new Stark Phase II regulations.
Siegel S
Health Care Law Mon; 2004 Jun; ():3-15. PubMed ID: 15250190
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Stark revelations.
Murer CG
Rehab Manag; 2003 Oct; 16(8):46-9. PubMed ID: 14558426
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Nuclear medicine and the Stark truth: what are the rules?
Greeson TW
J Nucl Med; 2007 Jul; 48(7):24N-28N. PubMed ID: 17607030
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Coding and reimbursement in arthroscopic surgery.
Beach WR; Ritchie J; Bert JM
Arthroscopy; 2002 Feb; 18(2 Suppl 1):96-121. PubMed ID: 11828350
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. A Stark Future for the Stark Law?
Collins A; Clark K; George A
Home Healthc Now; 2018; 36(6):393. PubMed ID: 30383600
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Stark rules. Purchases that pass muster.
Terry K
Med Econ; 2006 Dec; 83(24):44-6, 49. PubMed ID: 17249392
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. How did physician ownership become a federal case? The Stark Amendments and their prospects.
Stout SM; Warner DC
HEC Forum; 2003 Jun; 15(2):171-87. PubMed ID: 12918284
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Hospital-physician compensation methods under the Stark Act.
Becker S; Nino K
Health Care Law Mon; 1999 Mar; ():3-8. PubMed ID: 10351447
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Examining the impact of the new Stark rules on joint ventures.
Washlick JR
Healthc Financ Manage; 2008 Nov; 62(11):48-52. PubMed ID: 18990836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Stark has softer touch in new regs.
Ivers D
J Ark Med Soc; 2001 Nov; 98(5):141-7. PubMed ID: 11685807
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Yet more changes to the stark law regulations.
Reisman G; Wool HS; Chananie SJ; Finnegan JH
J Am Coll Radiol; 2009 Feb; 6(2):81-4. PubMed ID: 19179234
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Physician ownership and use of in-office advanced diagnostic imaging equipment: are IDTF standards a meaningful response to overutilization, quality, and costs?
Cicka MP
J Health Life Sci Law; 2009 Jan; 2(2):161, 163-86. PubMed ID: 19288892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Changes to the federal Stark law that affect diagnostic imaging arrangements.
Stirewalt K
Minn Med; 2009 Dec; 92(12):49-51. PubMed ID: 20092174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
