Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a continuous glucose monitor (CGM). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the CGM. You say that you are appealing the denied CGM. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the Medicare criteria for the CGM was not met. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that therapeutic CGMs are considered medically 
reasonable and necessary for enrollees with diabetes who use insulin with at least three daily administrations, 
require frequent self-adjustment of insulin dosage based on the blood glucose testing results and have had an 
in-person visit with their treating physician to assess adherence to their CGM regimen and diabetes treatment 
plan. 
 
  We looked at the file and Medicare rules. The documentation indicates that you do not use insulin with at least 
three daily injections. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the CGM have 
not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a continuous glucose monitor 
(CGM).
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for a facility visit provided on July 22, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for a facility visit. You say that we depend on the facility staff to verify eligibility 
and to obtain authorization. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that unauthorized, out-of-network care 
is not covered. 
 
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 provider of the item(s)/service(s) at issue in this appeal is not a network provider with the Plan. The Plan 
did not pre-approve the item(s)/service(s) at issue. We found no exception that would require the Plan to pay for the item(s)/service(s). Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for a facility visit provided 
on July 22, 2022.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pay for a continuous glucose monitor (CGM). 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the CGM. You say that the CGM is medically necessary for the enrollee. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says that the treatment records were not received; therefore, the Medicare 
criteria were not met. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that therapeutic CGMs may be considered reasonable and 
necessary for enrollees with diabetes who meet the criteria referenced 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 pay for the CGM. Our reviewer says that the CGM 
is medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found that the enrollee is on Methylene Diphenyl Isocyanate 
and adjusts the doses of Humalog based on blood glucose levels at the time; the criteria for the CGM have been 
met. 
 
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 CGM have been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pay for a 
continuous glucose monitor (CGM).  
  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: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for office visit provided on February 28, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for office visit. You say that you are requesting reconsideration. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says that unauthorized, out-of-network care is not covered. 
 
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 provider of the item(s)/service(s) at issue in this appeal is not a network provider with the Plan. The Plan 
did not pre-approve the item(s)/service(s) at issue. We found no exception that would require the Plan to pay for the item(s)/service(s). Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for office visit provided on 
February 28, 2022.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a removable unilateral partial denture (D5282). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the dental service. You say that the denture is medically necessary so you 
can properly eat on your left side. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the denial of authorization for 
this service is correct, because the removable unilateral partial denture is not covered by the Plan. 
 
Medicare generally does not cover dental services. However, the Plan offers a dental benefit that exceeds 
Medicare coverage. For that reason, the Plans coverage rules apply in this case. 
 
  Though the Plan offers a dental benefit in excess of Medicare coverage, the requested item or service is not 
among those covered under this benefit. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a 
removable unilateral partial denture (D5282).
Appeal type: Testing
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for Colonoscopy provided on October 13, 
2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for Colonoscopy. You say that you are disputing the share cost. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this cost sharing was charged correctly. 
 
The rules say a plan must disclose to its enrollees in clear, accurate terms all cost sharing information (such as 
copayments, deductibles and coinsurance). Your contract with the Plan clearly says that you must pay a $250 
copayment for Outpatient hospital services. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $250 copayment for Colonoscopy. This item/service falls within the Outpatient 
hospital services benefit category. This means that you have been asked to pay the correct amount based on 
your contract with the Plan. This cost sharing is a contractual obligation you agreed to pay when you enrolled 
in the Plan. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for Colonoscopy 
provided on October 13, 2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for therapeutic radiology provided on July 13, 
2022, to August 15, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for therapeutic radiology. You say that you are disputing the share 
cost. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this cost sharing was charged correctly. 
 
The rules say a plan must disclose to its enrollees in clear, accurate terms all cost sharing information (such as 
copayments, deductibles and coinsurance). Your contract with the Plan clearly says that you must pay $60 
copayment for outpatient diagnostic tests and therapeutic services and supplies.  
 
You have been asked to pay $60 copayment for each therapeutic radiology. This item/service falls within the 
outpatient diagnostic tests and therapeutic services and supplies benefit category. This means that you have 
been asked to pay the correct amount based on your contract with the Plan. This cost sharing is a contractual 
obligation you agreed to pay when you enrolled in the Plan. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to waive the copayment for therapeutic radiology provided on July 13, 2022, to August 15, 2022.
Appeal type: Testing
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for an outpatient surgery provided on 
September 09, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for an outpatient surgery. You say that you are disputing the share 
cost. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this cost sharing was charged correctly. 
 
The rules say a plan must disclose to its enrollees in clear, accurate terms all cost sharing information (such as 
copayments, deductibles and coinsurance). Your contract with the Plan clearly says that you must pay a $380 
copayment for Outpatient hospital services. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $380 copayment for an outpatient surgery. This item/service falls within the 
Outpatient hospital services benefit category. This means that you have been asked to pay the correct amount 
based on your contract with the Plan. This cost sharing is a contractual obligation you agreed to pay when you 
enrolled in the Plan. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for an 
outpatient surgery provided on September 09, 2022.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Synvisc One. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Synvisc One. You say that you would like the Plan to reconsider their 
denial. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this medication is confirmed to be furnished by a 
pharmacy and not the provider's office. 
 
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 Synvisc One.  
 
Benefits for Synvisc One 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 SNF care. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF care. You say that you would like reconsideration because the services 
are medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says a SNF admission 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 SNF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested SNF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found that the enrollee does not have daily skilled nursing needs that require the specialized 
skill, knowledge, and judgment of a skilled professional nurse. The enrollee does not have daily skilled therapy 
needs that require the specialized skill, knowledge, and judgment of a skilled professional therapist. The 
enrollee does not require daily skilled nursing or skilled therapy on 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 care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve SNF care.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for a specialist office visit provided on October 
10, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for a specialist office visit. You say that you disagree with the 
copayment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this cost sharing was charged correctly. 
 
The rules say a plan must disclose to its enrollees in clear, accurate terms all cost sharing information (such as 
copayments, deductibles and coinsurance). Your contract with the Plan clearly says that you must pay a $25 
copayment for physician/practitioner services/specialist visit.  
 
You have been asked to pay a $25 copayment for a specialist office visit. This item/service falls within the 
physician/practitioner services/specialist visit benefit category. This means that you have been asked to pay the 
correct amount based on your contract with the Plan. This cost sharing is a contractual obligation you agreed to 
pay when you enrolled in the Plan. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment 
for a specialist office visit provided on October 10, 2022.
Appeal type: Outpatient Mental Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the cost share for outpatient mental health care provided on 
March 29, 2022, to April 6, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the cost share for outpatient mental health care. You say that you disagree with the 
cost share. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this cost sharing was charged correctly. 
 
The rules say a plan must disclose to its enrollees in clear, accurate terms all cost sharing information. Your 
contract with the Plan says that there is a $1000 deductible which applies to outpatient mental health care. The 
amount you are being asked to pay is $215.99 towards your $1000 deductible. The item or service you asked 
the Plan to waive the cost share for falls within the outpatient mental health care benefit category. The Plan has 
followed Medicare rules by clearly disclosing in the contract that there is a $1000 deductible which applies to 
outpatient mental health care. This cost sharing is a contractual obligation that had not been met at the time 
outpatient mental health care was received on March 29, 2022, to April 6, 2022. Therefore, we decided that the 
Plan does not have to waive the cost share for outpatient mental health care provided on March 29, 2022, to 
April 6, 2022.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a surgical placement of implant body and crown 
restoration services (D6059, D6010) 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the dental services. You say that the services should be covered as you 
disagree with the denial and the services are medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says 
the services denied correctly as they do not fall within your dental benefits. 
 
Medicare generally does not cover dental services. However, the Plan offers a dental benefit that exceeds 
Medicare coverage. For that reason, the Plans coverage rules apply in this case. 
 
 
  Though the Plan offers a dental benefit in excess of Medicare coverage, the requested items or services are not 
among those covered under this benefit. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a 
surgical placement of implant body and crown restoration services (D6059, D6010)
Appeal type: Outpatient Mental Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an outpatient mental health visit provided on June 16, 2022, 
by an out-of-network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an outpatient mental health visit. You say that mental health services do not 
require an authorization. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services were rendered by an out-of-
network (OON) provider and there was no authorization on file for the services. 
 
 
 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 an outpatient mental health visit provided on June 
16, 2022, by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for the in-network diagnostic mammogram 
provided on September 20, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for the in-network diagnostic mammogram. You say that this 
service should be free. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this cost sharing was charged correctly. 
 
The rules say a plan must disclose to its enrollees in clear, accurate terms all cost sharing information (such as 
copayments, deductibles, and coinsurance). Your contract with the Plan clearly says that you must pay a $50 
copayment for in-network x-rays received in an outpatient hospital setting. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $50 copayment for the in-network diagnostic mammogram. This item/service 
falls within the outpatient diagnostic tests and therapeutic services and supplies benefit category. This means 
that you have been asked to pay the correct amount based on your contract with the Plan. This cost sharing is a 
contractual obligation you agreed to pay when you enrolled in the Plan. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to waive the copayment for the in-network diagnostic mammogram provided on September 20, 
2022.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the excision of a benign lesion (D7410) provided on April 
11, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the dental services. You say that the services should be covered as you disagree 
with the denial. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services denied correctly as they do not fall 
within your dental benefits. 
 
Medicare generally does not cover dental services. However, the Plan offers a dental benefit that exceeds 
Medicare coverage. For that reason, the Plans coverage rules apply in this case. 
 
 
  Though the Plan offers a dental benefit in excess of Medicare coverage, the requested items or services are not 
among those covered under this benefit. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the 
excision of a benign lesion (D7410) provided on April 11, 2022.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a crown (D2740) for tooth #4. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the dental service. You say that you are appealing the denied dental service. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says your benefit for the requested item or service has already been 
exhausted. 
 
Medicare generally does not cover dental services. However, the Plan offers a dental benefit that exceeds 
Medicare coverage. For that reason, the Plans coverage rules apply in this case. 
 
  Though the Plan offers a dental benefit in excess of Medicare coverage, certain limitations apply. The record 
shows your benefit for the requested item or service was exhausted on the date of service of June 16, 2021. 
Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a crown (D2740) for tooth #4.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve compression stockings identified with code A6549. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the compression stockings. You say that you feel that compression 
stockings will be better for you versus the wraps which would be more restrictive. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan you do not have a qualifying wound for coverage of compression stockings.  
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that compression stockings described by code A6549 are 
noncovered because they do not meet the statutory definition of a surgical dressing.   
Although this item may be appropriate, it does not fall into a covered benefit category and cannot be paid for 
by Medicare or the Plan. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve compression 
stockings identified with code A6549.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve office visit to be provided by an out-of-network (OON) 
provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve office visit. You say that you are requesting reconsideration. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee must receive their care from a network provider (for more 
information about this, see Section 2 in Chapter 3). In most cases, care the enrollee receives from an out-of-
network provider (a provider who is not part of the plan's network) will not be covered. 
 
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 
office visit to be provided by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a therapeutic continuous glucose monitor (CGM). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the therapeutic continuous glucose monitor (CGM). You say that the 
member is having fluctuating sugars and is on multiple medications. You also say this is the reason why the 
enrollee needs the requested durable medical equipment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the 
enrollee does not require insulin three or more times daily. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that therapeutic CGMs are considered medically 
reasonable and necessary for enrollees with diabetes who use insulin with at least three daily administrations, 
require frequent self-adjustment of insulin dosage based on the blood glucose testing results and have had an 
in-person visit with their treating physician to assess adherence to their CGM regimen and diabetes treatment 
plan. 
 We looked at the file and Medicare rules. The documentation indicates that the enrollee does not use insulin 
with at least three daily. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the 
therapeutic continuous glucose monitor (CGM) have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does 
not have to pre-approve a therapeutic continuous glucose monitor (CGM).