Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Ozurdex.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Ozurdex. You say that the medication is necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says based on the documentation provided, coverage criteria has not been met.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare pays for a drug or biological only if it is safe and effective and otherwise reasonable and necessary. We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve Ozurdex. Our reviewer says that the medication is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the documentation does not support that the Ozurdex is medically reasonable or necessary or safe and effective for the enrollee. We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of Ozurdex have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Ozurdex.
Appeal type: ER
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for emergency department services (99285) provided on July 5, 2020.
You asked the Plan to pay for the emergency department services. You say that you would like reconsideration based on the records submitted. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the documentation submitted does not support the level of service billed.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. Providers must report services with the appropriate CPT code. In this case, the CPT Code Manual definition of code 99285 is Emergency department visit for the evaluation and management of a patient, which requires these 3 key components within the constraints imposed by the urgency of the patient's clinical condition and/or mental status: A comprehensive history; A comprehensive examination; and Medical decision making of high complexity. Counseling and/or coordination of care with other physicians, other qualified health care professionals, or agencies are provided consistent with the nature of the problem(s) and the patient's and/or family's needs. Usually, the presenting problem(s) are of high severity and pose an immediate significant threat to life or physiologic function. We asked our coder to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pay for the emergency department services. Our reviewer says that CPT code 99285 does not meet criteria for billing or reimbursement consideration. Our reviewer found for Evaluation and Management coding all criteria must be met for History, Exam and Medical Decision Making to report appropriate level of service. In this case, Medical Decision Making is of Moderate Complexity for CT and Laboratory testing. Therefore, this should be down coded to lower level. We looked at this coder's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the emergency department services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for emergency department services (99285) provided on July 5, 2020.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Favorable

We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve a transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) with Doppler.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve these services. You say that you disagree with the denial. The Plan denied
your request. The Plan says that the services are not medically necessary.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that if there are no specific coverage rules for an item
or service, then that item or service will be covered when it is medically necessary.
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve these services. Our reviewer says that
the services are medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the enrollee has longstanding hypertension
and a history of atrial fibrillation. There have been no recent echocardiograms to assess her left ventricular
(LV) function, evidence of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), and possibly valvular heart disease contributing
to the paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. The TTE with Doppler is the standard of care and medically necessary to
get an assessment of the LV function and evidence of LVH.
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that
Medicare rules for coverage of these services have been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to preapprove
a transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) with Doppler.
If the Plan does not agree with our decision, they can ask us to open a case again. We only open a case again
if we believe there was a mistake or if there is new information to review. The Plan has to show us the mistake
and/or send us the new information. This does not happen often. If we decide to open the case again, we will
send you a letter.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve IRF admission and services.

You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that it is medically necessary for you to gain maximum
strength. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says based on Medicare guidelines, IRF services you and/or
your provider are requesting do not meet the requirements for approval.

The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically
reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section.

We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the
requested IRF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our
physician reviewer found that the complexity of your nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not require
an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. You were admitted for
syncope and altered mental status. Your medical problems are stable. There are no complex nursing or
rehabilitation needs. You do not require treatment by multiple therapies, including either physical therapy or
occupational therapy, and an intensive rehabilitation therapy program. While the medical record supports a
need for physical and/or occupational therapy, there is no documented need for intensive rehabilitation
services. Medically necessary care can be provided in a different level of care. There is not a reasonable
expectation that you will be able to fully participate in and benefit from the intensive rehabilitation therapy
program provided in an IRF.

We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have
to pre-approve IRF admission and services.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that you have complex needs. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services are not medically necessary.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section. We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the requested IRF care is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the records show that you were admitted to the hospital with a skin infection and hernia. Your medical problems are stable and you have no complex nursing or rehabilitation needs. You do not require treatment by multiple therapies, including either physical therapy or occupational therapy, and an intensive rehabilitation therapy program. While you may benefit from further therapy, you do not need intensive rehabilitation services. There is not a reasonable expectation that you will be able to fully participate in and benefit from the intensive rehabilitation therapy program provided in an IRF. We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: SNF
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a skilled nursing facility admission.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a skilled nursing facility admission. You say that the enrollee needs skilled nursing facility services before returning home. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says movement to a skilled nursing facility is not medically necessary.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare pays for care in a SNF when the four factors listed in the Medicare rules section are met. Custodial care is not covered. We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve a skilled nursing facility admission. Our reviewer says that daily skilled services are not necessary. Our physician reviewer found based on the medical records provided there is documentation that the patient requires skilled nursing services and skilled therapy services. This patient does not require the services on an inpatient basis in a skilled nursing facility setting. Continued care in the acute inpatient rehabilitation facility is appropriate until the patient is stable to transfer to a lower level of care such as home with home health services or to a long-term care facility. We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of a skilled nursing facility admission have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a skilled nursing facility admission.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Fentanyl patches.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Fentanyl. You say that the enrollee is well controlled on this therapy. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says Fentanyl to be taken at home is not covered under the Part B benefit.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare Part B generally does not pay for self-administered drugs. The self-administered drugs requested here are not among the types which are covered by Medicare Part B. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Fentanyl patches.
Benefits for Fentanyl may be available under Medicare Part D. Contact the Plan that administers Part D benefits for further information concerning any benefits and appeal rights.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a referral to an out-of-network cardiologist.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve these services. You say that you disagree with the denial. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services are available from network providers.
Medicare rules say that plans can require enrollees to get care from network providers. The contract with the Plan says that the Plan has to pre-approve care from out-of-network providers only in cases involving emergencies, out of area urgent care and care that cannot be provided by network providers. The requested provider in this case is not a network provider with the Plan. The Plan has network providers available who can provide the items/services at issue in this appeal. We found no exception that would require the Plan to pre-approve these items/services. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a referral to an out-of-network cardiologist.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve hydrocodone/acetaminophen.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve these services. You say that you disagree with the denial. The Plan denied
your request. The Plan says self-administered drugs are not covered.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare Part B generally does not pay for self-administered
drugs. The self-administered drugs requested here are not among the types which are covered by
Medicare Part B. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve
hydrocodone/acetaminophen.
Benefits for these services may be available under Medicare Part D. Contact the Plan that administers Part D
benefits for further information concerning any benefits and appeal rights.
Appeal type: SNF
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve skilled nursing facility (SNF) care.

You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF care. You say that the services are necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says based on the documentation provided, coverage criteria has not been met.

The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare pays for care in a SNF when the four factors listed in the Medicare rules section are met. Custodial care is not covered.

We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve SNF care. Our reviewer says that daily skilled services are not necessary. Our physician reviewer found you do not have documented skilled nursing needs. You do not have documented skilled therapy needs. You are noted to be at your functional baseline. Your care needs at this point are custodial and, as a practical matter, can be provided at a lower level of care.

We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of SNF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve skilled nursing facility (SNF) care.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute inpatient hospital care.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve acute inpatient hospital care. You say that the services are necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says based on the documentation provided, coverage criteria has not been met.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that inpatient hospital care is covered when the doctor expects the patient to need hospital care that crosses at least two midnights. In rare and unusual cases, consideration may be given to inpatient hospital care when the hospital stay does not cross two midnights or more. We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve acute inpatient hospital care. Our reviewer says that the documentation does not support that the criteria for inpatient admission is met in this case. Our physician reviewer found the procedure can be performed as an ambulatory procedure. There is no compelling rationale presented or extenuating circumstances noted to support the medical necessity of this request as an exception. Therefore, the request for inpatient admission is not medically reasonable or necessary. We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of acute inpatient hospital care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute inpatient hospital care.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the initial hospital care.

You asked the Plan to pay for the initial hospital care (99223). You say that the Plan should pay this claim. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the procedure was an ambulatory procedure.

The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that inpatient hospital care is covered when the doctor expects the patient to need hospital care that crosses at least two midnights. In rare and unusual cases, consideration may be given to inpatient hospital care when the hospital stay does not cross two midnights or more.

We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pay for the initial hospital care (99223). Our reviewer says that the documentation does not support that the criteria for inpatient payment are met in this case. Our physician reviewer found the review indicates that this procedure is an ambulatory procedure only. There was no explanation why the admission was needed and why it could not be done as ambulatory procedure. The review has determined that the record did not show that at the time of inpatient admission the admitting physician reasonably expected that the patient's necessary hospital care (including earlier ED and/or observation care) would span two midnights.

We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the initial hospital care (99223) have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the initial hospital care.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve long term acute care hospital (LTACH) services.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the LTACH services. You say that the enrollee needs long-term acute care
hospital services. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not meet the requirement for
an admission.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that LTACH services are covered if they are medically
necessary, reasonable, and appropriate for the diagnosis and condition of the enrollee.
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve the LTACH services. Our reviewer says
that the requested LTACH care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our
physician reviewer found there is no documentation provided necessitating admission to a LTACH. The
enrollee is receiving appropriate care at the present acute care hospital. The enrollee does not require services at
the LTACH that are not available at the acute care hospital where the enrollee is currently receiving care. There
are no services available at the LTACH that the enrollee requires that are not available at the health care setting
being offered by the health plan. The requested LTACH services are not medically necessary, reasonable, and
appropriate for the diagnosis and condition of the enrollee and able to be furnished safely and effectively only
on an inpatient basis.
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that
Medicare rules for coverage of the LTACH services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan
does not have to pre-approve long term acute care hospital (LTACH) services.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the home infusion therapy rendered on September 30, 2020.
You asked the Plan to pay for these services. You say that you disagree with the denial. The Plan denied your
request. The Plan says the services are not covered.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that that home infusion services and supplies may be
covered as a supplemental benefit. Home infusion therapy supplies are not covered by Original Medicare. The
Plan does not include a mandatory supplemental benefit for home infusion therapy services or supplies.
We looked at the file and Medicare and the Plan's rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare
and the Plan's rules for coverage of these services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does
not have to pay for the home infusion therapy rendered on September 30, 2020.
Appeal type: SNF
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve skilled nursing facility (SNF) services for the enrollee.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF services. You say that these services are medically necessary. The Plan
denied your request. The Plan says that there is no need for daily skilled therapy services to be provided by a
skilled therapist on a daily basis and no daily skilled nursing needs.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare pays for care in a SNF when the four factors
listed in the Medicare rules section are met. Custodial care is not covered.
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve SNF services. Our reviewer says that
daily skilled services are not necessary. Our physician reviewer found that the enrollee's condition does not
meet Medicare criteria for SNF services.
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that
Medicare rules for coverage of SNF services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not
have to pre-approve skilled nursing facility (SNF) services for the enrollee.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Feraheme.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve these services. You say that you disagree with the denial. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services are not medically necessary.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that iron therapy is covered when specific criteria are met. We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve these services. Our reviewer says that the services are not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the enrollee denies taking oral iron and has instead been drinking orange juice fortified with iron. Hemoglobin test results are within normal limits and the ferritin level is low, but within normal limits. The records do not support that the criteria for coverage of Feraheme are met. The services are not medically necessary. We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of these services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Feraheme.