Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
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 IRF care is medically necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the IRF care is not medically necessary, and the enrollee's needs can be met at a 
lower level of care such as a skilled nursing facility (SNF). 
 
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's medical problems are stable, and 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. 
 
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 incontinence supplies. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve incontinence supplies. You say that you were diagnosed with incontinence, 
and you are receiving therapies to see if this will help. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this item is 
not a covered benefit. 
 
The Plan covers all items that Medicare covers. Medicare rules state that incontinence supplies are not covered 
because they are hygienic items that are non-reusable.  
 
While incontinence supplies may be appropriate in this case, neither the Plan nor Medicare offers coverage of 
these items. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve incontinence supplies.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the coinsurance for the radiation therapy services provided on 
March 03, 2022, to March 31, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the coinsurance for the radiation therapy services. You say that you never paid for 
these services before. 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 20% 
coinsurance for therapeutic radiology services. 
 
You have been asked to pay 20% coinsurance for the radiation therapy services. This item/service falls within 
the therapeutic radiology 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 coinsurance for 
the radiation therapy services provided on March 03, 2022, to March 31, 2022.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a Via Disc NP allograft procedure. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the requested services. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the 
clinical effectiveness of the procedure has not been demonstrated for lumbar degenerative disc disease. 
 
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 requested services. Our physician 
reviewer found that you are being treated for other intervertebral disc degeneration of the lumbar region. You 
presented with low back pain. The pain is radiating down the bilateral lower extremities. There is limited 
published, large-scale, long-term peer-reviewed literature that shows this request to be an effective and/or safe 
treatment for the noted pathology. Further studies are needed to demonstrate this request has beneficial 
outcomes compared with conventional treatment. There is no compelling rationale presented or extenuating 
circumstances noted to support the medical necessity of this request as an exception. Therefore, the requested 
VIA disc NP allograft procedure at L4-5, in this case, 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 the requested services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve a Via Disc NP allograft procedure.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a bone replacement graft (D4263) and biologic 
materials to aid in soft and osseous tissue regeneration (D4265). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a bone replacement graft and biologic materials. You say that you would 
like these services to be approved for coverage. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says these services are 
not covered under your benefit 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 items or services are not 
among those covered under this benefit. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a 
bone replacement graft (D4263) and biologic materials to aid in soft and osseous tissue regeneration (D4265).
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for the specialist office visit provided on May 
02, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for the specialist office visit. You say that you did not have a visit 
with this provider on that day. 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 $15 
copayment for office visits to specialists. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $15 copayment for the specialist office visit. This item/service falls within the 
office visits to specialists 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. The records show that specialist services were provided on May 2, 2022. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for the specialist office visit provided on May 02, 
2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for outpatient diagnostic test provided on May 
14, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for outpatient diagnostic test. You say that you are requesting 
reconsideration. 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 $65 
copayment for provider and professional services.  
 
You have been asked to pay $59.56, which is less than the $65 copayment for outpatient diagnostic test. This 
item/service falls within the provider and professional 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 outpatient diagnostic test provided on May 14, 2022.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve foot orthotics. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve foot orthotics. You say that you're affected by not having foot inserts and 
need them due to medical conditions. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this item is not a covered 
benefit. 
 
Medicare rules state that supportive devices for the feet (such as orthotics) are only covered for patients with 
diabetic foot disease or for patients who wear a leg brace. The Plan follows these same rules.   
 
Records show that you do not suffer from diabetic foot disease and you do not wear a leg brace. Although 
orthotics may be appropriate for you, neither Medicare nor the Plan provides coverage of orthotics for your 
condition. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve foot orthotics.
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 discharging the enrollee to a sub-acute rehabilitation 
facility would help him optimize his safety by improving his strength, balance, and endurance before returning 
home. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says based on the most recent medical documentation, the 
member exceeds mobility and average daily living criteria for SNF admission. 
 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 the enrollee does not require skilled nursing or therapy services on a daily basis. Our 
physician reviewer also found that the enrollee does not meet the severity of illness or intensity of service 
criteria for an inpatient basis in an SNF. 
 
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: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for outpatient diagnostic test provided on June 
13, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for X-ray. You say that 5 dollars are a lot of money to pay for the 
Plan and it isn't fair. 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 $5 
copayment for Medicare-covered X-rays per day.  
 
You have been asked to pay $5 copayment for X-ray. This item/service falls within the Medicare-covered X-
rays per day 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 outpatient diagnostic test 
provided on June 13, 2022.
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 enrollee would like reconsideration based on the 
records submitted. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says an IRF admission is not medically necessary, 
and the enrollee can safely receive the services they need in a lower level of care. 
 
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 enrollees medical problems are stable, and they do not require ongoing 
physician supervision for management of any active or acute exacerbations of chronic medical conditions. 
While the medical record supports a need for physical or occupational therapy, their rehab needs can be safely 
provided in an alternate 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 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: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the LTACH services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the LTACH services. You say that the enrollee is not a candidate at this 
time for an acute rehabilitation and has too many medical complications at this time for a lower level of care. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says admission to the LTACH was denied as not meeting criteria, is not 
medically necessary, and continued acute hospital stay was offered until the enrollee could discharge to a lower 
level of care. 
 
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 setting. The enrollee does not 
require services at the LTACH that are not available at the acute care hospital where they are currently 
receiving 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 the LTACH services.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve an ophthalmology service to be rendered by an out-of-
network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve an ophthalmology service. You say that you were referred to this OON 
provider by your primary ophthalmologist. You also say that the in-network providers are not trained in the 
service you need provided. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this service will not be covered with an 
OON provider. 
 
Medicare generally does not cover routine vision and eyewear services. However, the Plan offers a routine 
vision and eyewear benefit that exceeds Medicare coverage. For that reason, the Plan's coverage rules apply in 
this case. The Plan covers these services when they are obtained from a provider in the Plans vision vendor 
network. 
 
We looked at the file and the Plan's rules. Specifically, you have asked to be treated by an OON provider. The 
record shows that there are in-network providers who can render this service. Based on this information, we 
decided that the Plan's rules for coverage of an ophthalmology service have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve an ophthalmology service to be rendered by an out-of-
network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve LTACH services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the LTACH services. You say that the enrollee is stable and suitable for 
transfer to an LTACH. You say that the enrollee cannot be adequately care for in her current condition at a 
lower level of care. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says an LTACH admission is not medically 
necessary the enrollee's needs can be safely given in the current health care setting. 
 
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 that the enrollee is still unstable and requires short-term additional acute care hospital 
services that can be safely provided at the current facility until they are more stable and ready for 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 LTACH services.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to reduce the copayment for a nuclear stress test provided on June 29, 
2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to reduce the copayment for a nuclear stress test. You say that you were told by both the 
plan and the facility that you would only have a $200 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 $335 
copayment for outpatient hospital services. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $335 copayment for a nuclear stress test. 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 reduce the copayment for a nuclear 
stress test provided on June 29, 2022.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the LTACH services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the LTACH services. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says based on 
Medicare guidelines the long term acute care hospital services you are requesting do not meet the requirements 
for approval. 
 
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 setting. The enrollee does not 
require services at the LTACH that are not available at the acute care hospital where they are currently 
receiving 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 the LTACH services.
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 IRF care is medically necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says that the coverage criteria has not been 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 that while the enrollee would benefit from physical and occupational therapy, the 
enrollee's rehab needs can be safely provided in an alternate and low intensity setting such as in a skilled 
nursing 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 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 IRF admission and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says admission to the IRF 
was denied as not meeting criteria, is not medically necessary, and a lower level of care might be appropriate. 
 
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 you were admitted for weakness, back pain, and urinary tract infection. Medical 
problems are stable.  
 There are no complex nursing or rehabilitation needs. While you have a need for physical or occupational 
therapy, there is no documentation of a need for an intensive rehabilitation program. 
 
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.