Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve an inpatient hospital admission. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve an inpatient hospital care. You say that the medical records provided 
support the need for an inpatient hospital admission. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says there was no 
documentation provided to support the expectation that the enrollee will require a greater than 2 midnight stay. 
The Plan says that if the enrollee experiences any peri- or post-operative complications, reconsideration for 
inpatient level of care can be performed on a concurrent review with updated clinical information. 
 
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 an inpatient hospital care. Our reviewer says that the documentation does not support that the criteria for an inpatient admission have met in this case. 
Our physician reviewer found the requested procedure is currently approved as an ambulatory procedure. There 
is no documentation provided to support the expectation the enrollee will require a greater than 2 midnight 
stay. The review has determined that the record does not show that at the time of the request for a inpatient 
admission the requesting physician reasonably expected that the patient's necessary hospital 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 an inpatient hospital care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the 
Plan does not have to pre-approve an inpatient hospital admission.
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 an LTACH admission is not medically 
necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the medical criteria for a LTACH admission has not 
been met. 
 
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 the enrollee had a complicated hospital course and is improving but still requires 
acute care services before transitioning to 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 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: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the laboratory services provided on January 24, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the laboratory services. You say that you would like this claim reprocessed and 
approved for payment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says no separate payment is made for these 
laboratory services. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules state that routine ESRD lab services are not separately 
payable. Labs should bill the facility directly for lab services as they are considered part of the composite rate. 
No other payment for these services is allowed. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for 
the laboratory services provided on January 24, 2022.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for laboratory services provided to the enrollee on January 13, 
2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the services. You say that this should be paid for. The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says laboratory testing related to treatment of end-stage renal disease is bundled into dialysis services 
and is not separately reimbursable. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules state that routine ESRD lab services are not separately 
payable. Labs should bill the facility directly for lab services as they are considered part of the composite rate. 
No other payment for these services is allowed. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for 
laboratory services provided to the enrollee on January 13, 2022.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for implant removal provided to the enrollee on October 19, 
2021. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the services. You say that this should be paid for. The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 20680-AS-59-RT (1 Unit) remains not supported. 
 
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 20680 is "Removal of implant; deep (eg, buried wire, pin, 
screw, metal band, nail, rod or plate)." 
 
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 services. Our reviewer says that the services at issue in 
this case were not supported by the medical records. Our reviewer found that the operative report does not 
support removal of implant as a separate and distinct procedure from the knee arthroplasty, as this procedure 
would be necessary integral part of the primary procedure. In this case, operative report describes 1 locking 
screw removed, during a right total knee arthroplasty. 
 
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 services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pay for implant removal provided to the enrollee on October 19, 2021.
Appeal type: Outpatient Therapies
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve five home physical therapy visits. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve therapy visits. You say that additional physical therapy is medically 
necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says you have progressed to a point that you do not require 
the specialized skills, knowledge, and judgement of a skilled therapist. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare pays for medically necessary outpatient 
therapy. 
 
 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 therapy visits. Our reviewer says that 
skilled services are not necessary to restore or maintain function or to prevent deterioration of the enrollee's 
condition. Our physician reviewer found that you have previously been treated with physical therapy and are 
independent with a home exercise program.  There is no documentation of a recent injury or decline in 
function. The additional therapy services are not an appropriate duration and frequency for treatment of your 
medical condition and therefore 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 therapy visits have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve five home physical therapy visits.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a spinal cord stimulator trial. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a spinal cord stimulator trial. You say that this device is medically 
reasonable and necessary for the enrollee's condition. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the criteria 
for coverage of the spinal cord stimulator have not been satisfied. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that a spinal cord stimulator trial can be covered only for 
patients who have undergone careful screening, evaluation and diagnosis by a multidisciplinary team prior to 
implantation. Such screening must include a psychological evaluation.  
 
The file does not show that a psychological evaluation has been conducted in conjunction with this request for 
a spinal cord stimulator trial. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a spinal cord 
stimulator trial.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the x-ray services provided on January 18, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the x-ray services. You say that you would like the plan to reconsider their 
denial. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services billed are not payable. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules state that Medicare plans are considered secondary insurers 
when an enrollee has another type of insurance. This means that the Plan is not responsible for paying for 
services until the claim for those services has gone to the primary insurer. However, plans are still required to 
coordinate their benefits with the primary insurers. Plans can coordinate their benefits with the primary insurers 
in three ways. First, the Plan can send the bill directly to the primary insurer for payment. Second, the Plan can 
direct the provider to send the bill to the primary insurer. Third, the Plan can pay for the services and submit a 
bill for reimbursement to the primary insurer.  
The Plan has met its obligation with regards to coordination of benefits. Specifically, the Plan has directed the 
provider to send the bill to the primary insurer. As the secondary insurer, the Plan cannot be held responsible 
for the x-ray services until the primary insurer has denied the claim for these services. Therefore, we decided 
that the Plan does not have to pay for the x-ray services provided on January 18, 2022.
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 the enrollee is not safe to be at home alone. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says an IRF admission 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 that the complexity of the enrollees nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does 
not require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The enrollee was admitted for acute encephalopathy and cervical spine surgery. The enrollees medical 
problems are stable. There are no complex nursing or rehabilitation needs. The enrollee 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 enrollee 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: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the lab testing related to end-stage renal disease provided on 
January 24, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the ESRD-related labs. You say that there is no contractual agreements that 
indicates that these codes are included in dialysis payment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says 
Medicare does not make separate payment for labs provided to ESRD patients in this setting. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules state that routine ESRD lab services are not separately 
payable. Labs should bill the facility directly for lab services as they are considered part of the composite rate. 
No other payment for these services is allowed. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for 
the lab testing related to end-stage renal disease provided on January 24, 2022.
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 the enrollee's medical management and rehabilitation 
needs require an inpatient rehabilitation stay and close physician supervision. The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says the denial of authorization for IRF care is correct. 
 
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 enrollee has chronic functional loss with modest recent decline and no other 
acute medical problems. The enrollee does not have intensive or complex rehabilitation needs and does not 
require frequent physiatry oversight. 
 
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: Lab
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pay for FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) testing provided to the enrollee on 
January 4, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the testing. You say that  The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that 
testing for the FANCC gene is not a Medicare benefit, and is a statutorily excluded service. 
 
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 reviewed the LCD cited by the Plan but find that it is not applicable to an FDA-approved test, as these are 
covered via the NCD cited in the Medicare rules section. An LCD cannot limit coverage allowed by an NCD, 
per the Medicare hierarchy of authority. As such, we disregarded the LCD cited by the Plan. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. The testing was provided to someone with solid tumor of the bone. 
The FDA approval notice indicates that this testing is approved for this indication. No other valid denial 
rationale was presented by the Plan. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of 
the testing have been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pay for FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) 
testing provided to the enrollee on January 4, 2022.  
 
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 long term acute care hospital (LTACH) services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the LTACH services. You say that the enrollee needs to be transferred to 
LTACH to maximize function and continue multi-disciplinary approach to care. The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says the denial of authorization for LTACH care is correct. 
 
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 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 current 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 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: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the drug testing provided on March 7, 2022 by an out-of-
network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the drug testing. You say that you would like the plan to reconsider their denial. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services provided are not a covered benefit. 
 
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 pay for care from out-of-network providers only in cases involving emergencies, 
out of area urgent care and pre-approved care.  
The requested provider in this case is not a network provider with the Plan. The Plan had network providers 
available who could have provided the items/services at issue in this appeal. The Plan did not pre-approve the 
item/service at issue. We found no exception that would require the Plan to pay for these items/services. 
Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the drug testing provided on March 7, 2022 by an 
out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 64418 billed for date of service July 22, 
2021. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 64418. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says payment for 
code 64418 is bundled into payment for code 20553. 
 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, we have confirmed that code 64418 
is a column II code to column I code 20553. This claim has not been billed with an appropriate modifier to 
bypass the edit. Based on the claim submitted, Medicare billing criteria have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 64418 billed for date of service July 22, 2021.
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 would benefit from going to an IRF because 
they are better equipped to assist you. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says you are progressing very 
well and do not require the intensive therapy that an IRF provides. 
 
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. Medical problems are stable. There are no complex nursing or rehabilitation needs. While the documentation does support a need for 
physical and/or occupational therapy, there is no documented need for an intensive, multi-disciplinary 
rehabilitation program. 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: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the wheelchair, elevating leg rest, and sales tax received on 
November 16, 2021, and November 21, 2021. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the wheelchair, elevating leg rest, and sales tax. You say that you would like the 
plan to reconsider their denial. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the items received are not a 
covered benefit. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare payment cannot be made to a provider that is 
not enrolled in the Medicare program. 
 
 Review of the file and Medicare records indicates that the providers at issue are not enrolled in the Medicare 
program. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the wheelchair, elevating leg rest, and 
sales tax received on November 16, 2021, and November 21, 2021.