It doesn't recommend against ANY automated acknowledgement. It says "any response...beyond 997." Sounds to me like they're all for 997's at the discretion of partners.
Status Quo, pretty much. (That suggests that the 999 development may be more or less academic...at least as it relates to HIPAA.) Best regards, Bill Chessman Inovis(tm), Inc. (formerly Harbinger and Extricity) -----Original Message----- From: Rachel Foerster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 7:58 AM To: WEDI SNIP Transactions Workgroup List Subject: RE: 997 Personally I take exception to the X12N/TG2/WG3 recommending against any automated acknowledgment of the 835. Whether to automate an acknowledgement process and how to do so, etc. should be a decision between the two trading partners. Simply because some of the IG authors feels there are challenges in automating an acknowledgment process doesn't ipso facto determine that it should not be done. This mind set flies in the face of administrative simplification, process improvement and operational cost reductions. Rachel Foerster Principal Rachel Foerster & Associates, Ltd. Professionals in Health Care EDI 39432 North Avenue Beach Park, IL 60099 Voice: 847-872-8070 Fax: 847-872-6860 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.rfa-edi.com -----Original Message----- From: William J. Kammerer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 8:11 AM To: WEDI SNIP Transactions Workgroup List Subject: Re: 997 Billie Jo: Yes, the standard acknowledgement for receipt of a functional group containing any transaction (other than the 997 itself) is the 997. But the 997 can only report that the 835 was successfully (or unsuccessfully) translated, passing the X12 syntax edits. If there are any semantic errors in the 835, these must be resolved manually, per the new 004050 835 guide: The [ASC X12N TG2 WG3] position is that the electronic notification of a problem is not sufficient by itself, and is too slow for the provider due to the potential financial impact. With that in mind, as well as the cost inherent in implementing an acknowledgment, the WG recommends NOT implementing anyresponse under version 4050 beyond the 997. If you read between the lines, I think this means that payers have no desire to contend with 824s from providers 'cause they're afraid they would have to deal with a myriad of "companion" guides describing one-off implementations of the HIPAA 824. What's good for the goose is decidedly NOT good for the gander. William J. "Billy Joe" Kammerer Novannet, LLC. Columbus, US-OH 43221-3859 +1 (614) 487-0320 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adams, Billie Jo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WEDI SNIP Transactions Workgroup List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, 21 January, 2003 08:18 AM Subject: 997 After sending an 835 would we receive a 997 to let us know that the 835 was received Billie Jo Adams --- The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated. The discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. These listservs should not be used for commercial marketing purposes or discussion of specific vendor products and services. They also are not intended to be used as a forum for personal disagreements or unprofessional communication at any time. You are currently subscribed to wedi-transactions as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this list, go to the Subscribe/Unsubscribe form at http://subscribe.wedi.org or send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you need to unsubscribe but your current email address is not the same as the address subscribed to the list, please use the Subscribe/Unsubscribe form at http://subscribe.wedi.org --- The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated. The discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. These listservs should not be used for commercial marketing purposes or discussion of specific vendor products and services. They also are not intended to be used as a forum for personal disagreements or unprofessional communication at any time. You are currently subscribed to wedi-transactions as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this list, go to the Subscribe/Unsubscribe form at http://subscribe.wedi.org or send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you need to unsubscribe but your current email address is not the same as the address subscribed to the list, please use the Subscribe/Unsubscribe form at http://subscribe.wedi.org --- The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated. The discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. These listservs should not be used for commercial marketing purposes or discussion of specific vendor products and services. They also are not intended to be used as a forum for personal disagreements or unprofessional communication at any time. You are currently subscribed to wedi-transactions as: [email protected] To unsubscribe from this list, go to the Subscribe/Unsubscribe form at http://subscribe.wedi.org or send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you need to unsubscribe but your current email address is not the same as the address subscribed to the list, please use the Subscribe/Unsubscribe form at http://subscribe.wedi.org
