Frequently Asked Questions

Strong documentation is the single most reliable shield you have in a Medicare audit. CMS requires DMEPOS suppliers to maintain complete, legible records for seven years, and reviewers will scrutinize three pillars every time: a compliant order, proof of medical necessity, and airtight proof of delivery. If any pillar wobbles, recoupments follow, even when the care was appropriate.

The Foundation: the Standard Written Order and a disciplined intake procedure

Before you dispense or ship, make sure a Standard Written Order (SWO) is in your file with every required element: beneficiary name or Medicare Beneficiary Identifier (MBI), order date, a general description of the item (sufficient to identify what was provided), quantity if applicable, the treating practitioner’s name or NPI, and the practitioner’s signature. Build your intake around capturing these elements up front so you’re never back-filling under deadline pressure.

Some items also carry face-to-face and written-order-prior-to-delivery (WOPD) rules; for those categories, the SWO must be communicated to the supplier before delivery and the encounter must occur within the required timeframe. Calibrate your intake checklist to the item you’re dispensing so you don’t ship before you have the right paperwork in place.

The Core Question: Proving medical necessity

For surgical dressings and other wound-care supplies, chart what Medicare contractors expect to see: wound location, size/measurements, depth or stage as relevant, drainage/exudate, debridement status, and the clinical rationale for the chosen product and change frequency. Treating practitioner notes should be updated each visit, and must support ongoing use and quantities. Align your quantities and change frequency with the Local Coverage Determination (LCD) for your area to avoid “excess utilization” denials.

Link each product to the documented condition. Your file should make it obvious why this beneficiary needed this dressing type, size, and number of units at this frequency. When LCDs specify typical change frequencies, treat those as guardrails unless your notes justify a deviation.

Proof of delivery: the Achilles’ heel of many DME claims

Auditors deny otherwise valid claims because proof-of-delivery (POD) is missing a date, an address, or a signature. Familarize yourself the rules for each delivery method, and ensure that you follow them to the letter. For supplier-delivered items, maintain a beneficiary (or designee) signature and a document that lists the patient’s name, a description of each item, quantities, and the delivery date.

Common avoidable errors include illegible signatures, missing or mismatched dates, descriptions that don’t identify the item dispensed, and shipping records that prove dispatch but not delivery. Build spot-checks into your workflow and use a standardized POD template to keep these pitfalls out of your files.

Seeking Order: organization and rapid retrieval

An audit-proof file is organized the same way every time. Create a consistent structure, medical necessity support ( including physician notes, measurements, photos if used, LCD cross-references), supplier documentation (invoices, serial/lot numbers), and proof of delivery. Index everything by claim number and date so you can retrieve a complete file on short notice.

You should build quality control into the routine of your business. Schedule brief, regular internal reviews of a sample of recent claims to confirm the accuracy and organization of the information auditors would collect. Small corrections of errors caught internally are a far more affordable investment than having to defend against a substantial Medicare contractor extrapolation audit after the fact.

A system that works for you

When you operationalize the pillars of an audit-proof documentation system, through checklists, templates, and recurring self-audits, documentation stops being a burden and becomes a business asset that protects revenue and credibility with contractors. If you’d like help designing a documentation system that tracks the latest CMS and DME MAC requirements, Health Law Alliance can help you build an audit-proof documentation system tailored to your DME operation. Schedule a free consultation today!

MORE ARTICLES BY CATEGORY

Get a Free Case REVIEW

100% Confidential & Secure. Your details are safe with us.

We'll speak soon!

In the meantime, why not find out more about us or visit our blog.

Alternatively, give us a call at (800) 345 - 4125

Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Why Even Minor Documentation Errors Can Be Costly for Pharmacies Facing a PBM Audit

PBMs are using rigid documentation standards to recoup payments and pressure pharmacies. Minor clerical errors can now threaten reimbursement and network participation.

Read More >>

The Hidden PBM Threat Putting Pharmacies at Risk: Affiliation-Based Network Terminations

PBMs are quietly expanding their power, terminating pharmacies based on affiliation rather than wrongdoing and putting entire businesses at risk overnight.

Read More >>

Health Law Alliance Successfully Defends a New York Pharmacy in an Optum Audit

Facing an Optum PBM audit that threatened network participation, a New York pharmacy turned to Health Law Alliance for strategic legal guidance, resulting in a successful audit resolution and uninterrupted network status.

Read More >>

The Performant Audit Playbook: How to Protect Your Practice from New York’s New Medicaid RAC

For years, New York healthcare providers have navigated the complex oversight of the Office of the Medicaid Inspector General (OMIG), primarily through its Medicaid Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) vendors. In April 2025 the landscape shifted as the state engaged Performant Healthcare Solutions (“Performant”) as its exclusive Medicaid Recovery Audit Contractor (“RAC”).

Read More >>