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

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a skilled nursing facility (SNF) admission and services.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF services. You say that the enrollee cannot get around by herself. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not have a need for skilled nursing or skilled therapy services.
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 from a nursing perspective, the enrollee received oral medications, had stable vital signs, was treated for pain with effect, and her lungs were clear. There are no identifiable skilled nursing service needs. Regarding rehab services, the enrollee was at a standby assist level for functional mobility. She required varying assist with activities of daily living. Although there are identifiable skilled therapy service needs, the enrollee does not require skilled nursing or therapy services on a daily basis. She does not meet severity of illness or intensity of service criteria for an inpatient basis in a SNF setting.
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 a skilled nursing facility (SNF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve an acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that an IRF admission is medically necessary for the enrollee. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not meet criteria for coverage of an IRF admission.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that an 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 the patient's nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The patient was admitted for hepatic encephalopathy associated with pancreatic cancer. He was then transferred to a skilled nursing facility where he is receiving physical therapy services. His medical problems are stable. There are no complex nursing or rehabilitation needs. The patient does 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.
Additionally, there is not a reasonable expectation that this patient 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 an acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Prolia (J0897).

You asked the Plan to pre-approve Prolia (J0897). You say that you want the enrollee treated with this drug. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the health plan states the enrollee has not first tried and had a contraindication or intolerance to zoledronic acid.

Medicare covers Part B medications when they are reasonable and necessary but allows health plans to implement step therapy criteria. The Plan's contract indicates that it has implemented such criteria for certain Part B medications.

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 Prolia (J0897). Our reviewer says that the drug is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found there is no evidence that the enrollee is allergic to or intolerant of these other forms of medication. There is no evidence that the enrollee has tried and not responded to these other forms of medication. There is no documentation as to why these other forms of medication would not be expected to be safe and effective for the enrollee. Therefore, the requested Prolia is not shown to be currently medically necessary and reasonable.

We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of Prolia (J0897) have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Prolia (J0897).
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve hearing aids.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve hearing aid. You say that the enrollee needs hearing aids. The Plan denied
your request. The Plan says the hearing aids are being submitted under the wrong referral process and are not
covered under Medicare.
Medicare does not pay for hearing aids or related services. However, the Plan offers a hearing aid benefit that
exceeds Medicare coverage. For that reason, the plan's coverage rules apply in this case. The Plan allows a
hearing aid benefit of $1510.
We looked at the file, and the Plan's rules. The request should be submitted to the Plan under the Medicare
benefit. Based on this information, we decided that the Plan's rules for coverage of hearing aid have not been
met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve hearing aids.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve inpatient hospital services for the enrollee.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve inpatient hospital services. You say that these services are medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that there is no documentation provided to support the expectation the enrollee will require a greater than 2 midnight stay.
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 inpatient hospital services. Our reviewer says that inpatient hospital services are not medically reasonable and necessary for the enrollee. The enrollee is undergoing a planned right shoulder arthroplasty. The enrollee is medically stable and has been provided medical clearance to undergo this elective procedure. The planned procedure listed under CPT code 23472 is NOT listed on the CMS Inpatient Only List. The procedure is currently approved as an ambulatory procedure. The review has determined that the record does not show that at the time of inpatient admission the admitting physician reasonably expects that the patient's necessary hospital care would span two midnights. Our physician reviewer found that the enrollee's condition does not meet Medicare criteria for inpatient hospital 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 inpatient hospital services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve inpatient hospital services for the enrollee.
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 it is felt that intensive rehab services would be best as well as close medical management. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the criteria for IRF care are not met.
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 the patient was admitted for peripheral vascular disease and had a below the knee amputation. Medical problems are stable. There are no complex nursing or rehabilitation needs. While the medical record supports a need for physical and/or occupational therapy, there is no documented need for intensive rehabilitation services. There is not a reasonable expectation that this patient 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: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a thermometer.

You asked the Plan to pre-approve a thermometer. You say that you would like reconsideration because you need to be aware of your temperature to go to the emergency room if needed. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the thermometer is not medical in nature.

The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that first-aid or precautionary-type equipment is considered non-medical. 

The item at issue in this appeal does not serve a purpose that is primarily medical in nature. This item is available to the general public and would be helpful even to those who are not sick or injured. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a thermometer.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute IRF admission and services.

You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that the stay is medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the stay is 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 considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our physician reviewer found 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 aphasia and had a craniotomy to treat a recurrent meningioma. 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 acute IRF admission and services.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Procrit for the enrollee.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Procrit. You say that the enrollee is stable on this medication. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that this is covered under Part D.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that, in order to be eligible for coverage under Part B, drugs/biologicals must represent an expense to the rendering physician and be included in the physician's bill. In this case, we have confirmed that the requested medication will be dispensed by a pharmacy and will be brought to the office for administration. Since the medication does not represent an expense to the physician and will not be included in the physician's bill, it is not eligible for Part B coverage. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Procrit for the enrollee.
Benefits for Procrit 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 the genicular nerve block.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the genicular nerve block. You say that you would like reconsideration
because this service is medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says there is not enough
evidence to show that this procedure is safe and effective for knee pain.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that items and services that are not medically
necessary are 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 the genicular nerve block. Our reviewer
says that the requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our
physician reviewer found this service is still under clinical investigation.
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 genicular nerve block have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the
Plan does not have to pre-approve the genicular nerve block.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute IRF admission and services.
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that the stay is medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the stay is 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 considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our physician reviewer found 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 lumbar fracture, rhabdomyolysis, and a urinary tract infection after a fall. 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 acute IRF admission and services.
Appeal type: Step-Therapy
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Durolane (J7318).
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Durolane. You say that you would like this drug to be approved. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this request does not meet the Plan's Part B step therapy criteria for the requested agent.
Medicare covers Part B medications when they are reasonable and necessary but allows health plans to implement step therapy criteria. The Plan's contract indicates that it has implemented such criteria for certain Part B medications. 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 Durolane. Our reviewer says that Durolane is not medically reasonable and necessary for the enrollee. Our physician reviewer found the Plan requires a trial of drugs Orthovisc and Monovisc before they will approve the requested drug. Our reviewer found that in this case, the enrollee has not tried and failed the required drugs. Our physician reviewer also found that there is no documentation provided indicating that the Plan's required drugs would likely be less effective and/or likely have adverse effects 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 Durolane have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Durolane (J7318).
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 for the enrollee.

You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that the enrollee requires inpatient acute rehabilitation in effort to facilitate increased independence and return home with improved quality of life. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that the enrollee can safely receive the services needed in other settings.

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. The complexity of the patient's nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The patient was admitted for surgical repair of a hip fracture after a fall. The enrollee's medical problems are stable. There are no complex nursing or rehabilitation needs. The patient does 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 this patient will be able to fully participate in and benefit from the intensive rehabilitation therapy program provided in an IRF. Our physician reviewer found that the enrollee's condition does not meet Medicare criteria for IRF 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 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 for the enrollee.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve ten skilled nursing and eight skilled therapy home care visits.

You asked the Plan to pre-approve the visits. You say that this is medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the criteria for homebound status is not met.

The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that home health care services may be covered if it is medically necessary for the enrollee to receive skilled nursing or therapy. A doctor must certify the need for home health care services.

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 visits. Our reviewer says that the requested visits are not medically reasonable or necessary. Our physician reviewer found you do not have documented skilled nursing needs. You do not have documented skilled therapy needs. You ambulate at such a level that you do not appear to be homebound. Therefore, the requested home health services are not shown to be medically necessary or reasonable.

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 visits have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve ten skilled nursing and eight skilled therapy home care visits.
Appeal type: Home Health
Decision: Unfavorable

We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the personal care services (T1019) provided from January 28, 2019, to December 13, 2019.
You asked the Plan to pay for the personal care services. You say that you would like to appeal these services. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this service is not covered.
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that custodial care is not covered. We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the personal care services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the personal care services (T1019) provided from January 28, 2019, to December 13, 2019.