Healthcare IT Blog

If your neurology practice has not reviewed its billing workflows against the 2026 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, there is a real chance your team is submitting claims under criteria that no longer apply. Every January brings a round of CPT revisions, relative value unit (RVU) adjustments, and policy changes that affect how neurology services are documented and reimbursed. In 2026, several of those changes hit areas that neurology practices rely on heavily: evaluation and management services, high-cost drug administration, and the evolving telehealth coverage rules that many practices built significant patient volume around.

Laboratory Billing Staffing Shortages: Why More Labs Are Outsourcing Revenue Cycle Management Laboratories across the country are facing a growing operational challenge: finding and retaining qualified laboratory billing staff. What was once considered a back-office function has become one of the most critical and difficult positions to fill in the laboratory industry. From clinical labs and pathology groups to molecular and toxicology laboratories, many organizations are struggling with staffing shortages, employee turnover, payer complexity, and increasing billing compliance demands.

Radiology Billing in 2026: Reducing Denials, Protecting Revenue, and Leveraging AIRadiology continues to serve as the backbone of modern diagnostics, supporting everything from early detection to complex treatment planning. But while the clinical importance of imaging continues to grow, the financial side of radiology has become significantly more challenging. In 2026, radiology billing is no longer just about clean claim submission. It requires precision, speed, compliance, and increasingly—technology. Practices that fail to adapt are seeing rising denial rates, slower reimbursements, and increased administrative strain.

A patient is admitted for a major procedure. The surgeon performs the operation. The anesthesiologist manages the case. The hospitalist covers post-operative care. The hospital provides the room, nursing staff, equipment, and overhead. When the dust settles, two separate billing operations need to produce two separate claims for the same admission. One covers what the physicians did. The other covers what the facility provided. Neither claim can bill what the other is already billing. And if either side gets it wrong, the revenue consequences land on both.

A patient spends four nights in the hospital after cardiac symptoms. They feel cared for. The clinical team did excellent work. Then the bill arrives. Their Medicare covers almost nothing because they were never technically admitted. They were under observation. The hospital stay looks identical to an inpatient admission from the patient's point of view. Under Medicare, it is an entirely different financial event.

The claim went out clean. The test was ordered. The patient qualified. And then the denial arrived anyway. If that sequence sounds familiar, your lab is likely losing revenue to a coverage gap that your current billing system cannot see. Local Coverage Determinations and National Coverage Determinations govern whether Medicare will pay for a test, under what circumstances, and with what documentation attached. When those rules are not built into your billing workflow, the errors do not announce themselves. They hide inside an aging AR report and a denial pile that keeps growing.

In an industry filled with legacy systems, rigid workflows, and software that often forces laboratories to work around its limitations, TrueMed LIS takes a different approach. TrueMed LIS is a modern laboratory information system built around one simple idea: the LIS should adapt to the lab — not the other way around. For years, TrueMed LIS has supported diagnostic laboratories by helping them launch new testing programs, connect critical systems, improve efficiency, and manage complex workflows. While many vendors rely heavily on marketing, TrueMed LIS has grown through real client results, long-term trust, and word-of-mouth referrals from labs that needed their system to simply work.

Your orthopedic billing team is stretched. Denials are up, AR is aging, and your billers are spending more time on rework than on new claims. You know the revenue cycle needs to change. The question is whether you need better software, a fully outsourced billing team, or something in between. The wrong answer costs money. So does the delay.

Your orthopedic practice runs complex procedures, manages prior authorizations for every major surgery, bills global periods, tracks implant costs, and navigates payer-specific modifier rules all in the same day. That is not a billing job. That is a specialty revenue cycle operation. And the vendor you trust with it matters far more than most practices realize before they start losing money.

When behavioral health practices evaluate whether to keep billing in-house or outsource revenue cycle management (RCM), the comparison often begins with a single number: the biller’s salary. Unfortunately, that number rarely reflects the true cost of managing behavioral health billing internally.