Martha M. Rumore, PharmD, JD, MS, LLM, FAPhA is Of Counsel at Health Law Alliance and a registered U.S. Patent Attorney

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 Consultation

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.

California Hospice Fraud Crackdown: What it Means for Providers & How to Protect Your Business

California’s hospice fraud crackdown is only the beginning of what CMS and Medi-Cal regulators have claimed will be many more cases brought against hospice facilities and home health agencies. Providers who do not timely respond to a suspension or revocation may waive important rights. Act now to protect your business and reputation from governmental overreach based on data mining and other unreliable sources.

Read More >>

The WISeR Model: A New Era of Prior Authorization and Audit Risks for Wound Care

On January 1, 2026, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) officially launched the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction (WISeR) Model. This initiative is not just another administrative hurdle; it is a technology-driven enforcement overhaul aimed directly at the wound care industry.

Read More >>

OMIG Audit Defense New York: What the 2026 Work Plan Means for Providers

Every year, the New York Office of the Medicaid Inspector General (OMIG) releases its Work Plan outlining enforcement priorities. The 2026 plan sends a clear signal that Medicaid providers in New York are entering a far more aggressive enforcement environment.

Read More >>

PBM Member Denial Audit Findings: A Growing Threat to Pharmacies

Pharmacies undergoing a Pharmacy Benefit Manager (PBM) audit are typically prepared to address inventory discrepancies and documentation issues. What many are not prepared for, however, is the increasing use of PBM member denial findings, allegations that a patient claims they did not receive and/or did not authorize the dispensing of a medication for which a claim was submitted.

Read More >>