.svg)
Final Call For Submitting Your Comments To CMS
Now is the time to have your voice heard. We are here to help you submit your comments to CMS.
Instructions for Submission
We urge you to submit comments to CMS on the proposed 2026 Physician Fee Schedule and to specifically address the deficiencies in the proposed skin substitute reimbursement. Comments are due by 5:00 PM Eastern Time on September 12, 2026.
Comments may be submitted electronically to CMS-2025-0304-0009 on https://www.regulations.gov/commenton/CMS-2025-0304-0009
Suggested Comment Template (Customize as Needed)
As a wound care clinician, I strongly oppose the CMS proposal of $125.38 per cm² rate for Skin substitutes under CMS–2025–0304–P. This rate in inadequate and will restrict patient access to advanced wound care and bring innovation in the space to a halt.
I support the consensus proposal developed by Dr. William Tettelbach and many other clinical, industry and reimbursement experts. Tettelbach et al., Safeguarding access, fiscal responsibility and innovation: a comprehensive reimbursement framework for CAMPs to preserve the Medicare Trust Fund, Journal of Wound Care, https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2025.0396.
I offer these additional comments:
The Methodology Used to Calculate The Proposed Reimbursement Rate is Improper.
To calculate the skin substitute reimbursement rate, CMS should take into account weighted product usage in all relevant settings of care, and should not restrict consideration only to the HOPD. Based on the work of Tettelbach and others, I suggest that a rate in the range of $700 per sq cm would be appropriate to ensure patient access to care and maintain innovation.
Application Fees Should Also Be Equal Between Sites of Care
If the PFS and OPPS systems are to be equilibrated, as CMS has indicated is its intent, the clinical fee paid under the physician fee schedule is far too low. Under the current proposal, the HOPD would receive a facility fee of $708 with independent and mobile providers only receiving about $150. These should be equalized.
Increased Reimbursement Should be Based on Clinical Evidence, Not FDA Status
CMS should equalize reimbursement for all skin substitute products for 2026, but continue to work with industry and the clinical community to develop a strategy to provide additional reimbursement to support innovation and clinically proven product effectiveness in future years. Rather than basing pricing differentiation on FDA classification, I suggest that comparative clinical evidence is the only appropriate basis of pricing differentiation.
The future effective LCDs are inappropriate
In light of the proposal that skin substitutes are considered “incident to” supplies under the PFS the requirements for randomized controlled trials and a covered list of products both countermands FDA requirements and is unmanageable. The future effective LCDs are nothing more than unnecessary regulation restricting clinical decisionmaking and effective patient care. They are no longer helpful since CMS is addressing the core problem of the reimbursement rate directly, and should be rescinded.
Popular Posts
Categories
The Crystal Ball: NO ONE HAS IT! A New Chapter in Wound Care From a Plastic Surgeons Perspective
Wound Care Compliance & Audit Defense Essentials: Inside the Series Every Provider Should Be Watching
Venture Medical’s Wound Care Compliance & Audit Defense Essentials webinar series empowers clinicians and administrators to navigate today’s complex regulatory environment with clarity and confidence. Through expert-led sessions covering legal, billing, and investigative insights, the series helps providers stay compliant, reduce audit risk, and strengthen their practice for the future.
Running A Mobile Wound Practice With Confidence
Provider Jessica Hoge, MD shares how she’s streamlined her workflow, improved patient care, and eliminated frustration.
Avoiding wound care for free, a.k.a. surviving a “bad faith” audit.
Audits are meant to protect against fraud, but in wound care many providers are now facing aggressive “bad faith” audits driven by financial incentives and bias. This blog explores what’s behind the rise in these audits, their impact on patients and practitioners, and the steps providers can take to prepare, push back, and protect their practices.
The price patients will pay for the PFS
After a recent survey we conducted, it is clear most clinicians agreed skin substitutes are highly effective and essential, warning that the proposed rates would reduce patient access, hinder innovation, and threaten the viability of many practices. Read the blog to learn more about our findings.
