Frequently Asked Questions

The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a civil action against Vohra Wound Physicians Management, alleging various schemes to submit false claims for payment to Medicare. Learn more about the ongoing lawsuit and how Health Law Alliance supports wound care providers to avoid legal scrutiny.

On April 4, 2025, the Department of Justice initiated a civil action against Vohra Wound Physicians Management LLC (“Vohra”), one of the largest specialty wound care providers in the nation, alleging multiple violations of the False Claims Act. The lawsuit alleges that Vohra and its founder, Dr. Ameet Vohra, engaged in a complex scheme to overbill Medicare for debridement procedures, many of which were allegedly not performed or were not medically necessary. 

In its complaint, the DOJ alleges wide-ranging efforts to overbill for debridement procedures across the Practice’s locations, including the use of a proprietary EMR system that automatically billed debridement procedures as the highest-reimbursing type of procedure, regardless of procedure type. The system allegedly inserted false clinical observations into patient charts, using pre-programmed text to create the false impression that surgical procedures were performed to evade audit scrutiny. The DOJ further alleged that Vohra intentionally failed to educate its physicians, who were not wound specialists by training, about the different types of debridement procedures and corresponding Medicare payment rules during training, pressuring physicians to perform as many debridements as possible through aggressive revenue goals and targets.

Enhanced Regulatory Oversight: Key Takeaways for Wound Care Providers

The lawsuit is a reminder of the increasing legal and regulatory scrutiny facing providers in 2025. Just last year, CMS initiated a “clawback” initiative aimed at recouping overpayments to providers with a particular emphasis on wound care procedures, citing high rates of incomplete or insufficient documentation and coding errors as common issues. In particular, OIG has signaled its intent to increase its oversight into wound care providers’ billing. In November 2024, OIG announced it would be dedicating significant resources to review Part B payments for skin substitute claims as part of its Work Plan

While wound care has long been a target of federal enforcement activity, wound care practice continues to rapidly evolve, particularly as the aging population increases and new technologies arise. 2025 has already begun to see more widespread federal investigation of wound care practices, meaning wound care providers are under more pressure now than ever before—facing audits, investigations, and even civil and criminal penalties.

Your Partners in Navigating Wound Care’s Changing Landscape

Successfully navigating a complex regulatory environment requires expert legal guidance. With decades of experience helping providers navigate audits, minimize their financial exposure, and defend against overpayment allegations, our team partners with you to address the challenges facing your practice and help ensure your practice is prepared for any situation. 

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.

RPM Roundup: Compliance Insights from Recent Remote Patient Monitoring Settlements

Federal enforcement actions are increasingly focused on remote patient monitoring (RPM) services. In this article, we break down two recent settlements involving RPM companies—Health Wealth Safe and Capital Health—and discuss key compliance takeaways for telehealth providers.

Read More >>

Ketamine Clinics & Compounders Now the Focus of Increased DEA Enforcement

The DEA is increasingly targeting ketamine providers with record-keeping inspections and audits, making expert Medicare and DEA compliance defense essential to avoid steep fines and license risks.

Read More >>

HLA's Diana Yastrovskaya Featured on Live TV for PBM Expertise

The feature underscores HLA’s mission to elevate thought leadership within the healthcare space and provide trusted expertise on issues that directly impact patients, providers, and policymakers.

Read More >>

By Appointment Only: How DME Suppliers Can Prevent Unexpected DME License Revocations

DME suppliers can prevent unexpected and costly license revocations by strategically applying with a "By Appointment Only" designation. This article explores the common compliance trap of failing unannounced site visits due to conflicts between standard pharmacy operating hours and Medicare's "posted hours" requirement for DME suppliers. "By Appointment Only" status is a crucial safeguard, which suppliers can take to implement to protect their DME billing privileges.

Read More >>