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

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve an osteogenesis stimulator (E0748) to be provided by an 
out-of-network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve an osteogenesis stimulator. You say that you disagree with the denial and 
are requesting reconsideration due to the enrollee's chronic back pain. The Plan denied your request. The Plan 
says the Plan does not cover services provided by an OON provider. 
 
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 
an osteogenesis stimulator (E0748) to be provided by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the genetic testing provided on April 15, 2022, billed with 
codes 81162, 81201, 81314, 81321, 81334, 81351 and 81479. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the genetic testing billed. You say that these services were necessary and are 
supported in the medical record. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this claim was not billed in 
accordance with Medicare rules. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that if one laboratory procedure evaluates multiple genes 
using a next generation sequencing (NGS) procedure, the laboratory shall report only one unit of service of one 
genomic sequencing procedure, molecular multianalyte assay, multianalyte assay with algorithmic analysis, or 
proprietary laboratory analysis code. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. This was an NGS panel that was not billed with a single panel code 
as required. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the genetic testing billed have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the genetic testing provided on 
April 15, 2022, billed with codes 81162, 81201, 81314, 81321, 81334, 81351 and 81479.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for telephone evaluation and management service provided on 
April 10, 2022, by an out-of-network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for telephone evaluation and management service. You say that you would like to 
request reconsideration for payment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the provider is out-of-
network, and it was determined these services can be received in-network. 
 
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 telephone evaluation and management service 
provided on April 10, 2022, by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
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 prior living situation was living at 
home. The long-term discharge plan is to return to home. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the 
Medicare medical 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 there is not a reasonable expectation that the 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 acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the intracept procedure (CPT code 64628). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the intracept procedure. You say that the service is medically necessary. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says there is little evidence in the medical literature to suggest that this is an 
appropriate procedure for the enrollee's back 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 intracept procedure. Our reviewer 
says that the requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our 
physician reviewer found there is no compelling rationale presented or extenuating circumstances noted to 
support the medical necessity of this request as an exception. Therefore, the requested intracept intraosseous 
basivertebral nerve ablation at L3 and L4 levels, 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 intracept procedure have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve the intracept procedure (CPT code 64628).
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 23430 billed for date of service September 3, 
2021. 
 You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 23430. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says payment for code 23430 is bundled into payment for code 23472. 
 
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 23430 
is a column II code to column I code 23472. 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 23430 billed for date of service September 3, 
2021.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Aranesp. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve these services. You say that you disagree with the denial. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the step therapy requirement is not met. 
 
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 these services. Our reviewer says that 
the services are not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the enrollee has unspecified anemia. 
She has not tried and failed the Plan's required drugs, Retacrit or Procrit for at least two consecutive months. 
The records do not show that the required drugs would be contraindicated or less effective; therefore, Aranesp 
is not reasonable or medically necessary. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of these services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve Aranesp.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the genetic testing provided on December 29, 2021. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the testing. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the claim was billed 
incorrectly. 
 The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that to report a Molecular Diagnostic Test service, the 
appropriate claim information must be submitted.  
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. In this case, the claim was submitted without an appropriate DEX Z-
Code as required by LCA A56973. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of 
the testing have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the genetic testing 
provided on December 29, 2021.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for lab services provided on February 23, 2021. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the lab services. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says you billed with an incorrect place of service on the claim. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that, for lab services, the POS code must reflect the 
location in which the sample was taken. POS code 81 is used to describe samples taken by the laboratory 
directly. 
 
 
 We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for 
coverage of the lab services have not been met. Specifically, this claim was billed with the laboratory POS 
code. The records do not support that the sample was taken in a laboratory setting. Therefore, we decided that 
the Plan does not have to pay for lab services provided on February 23, 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 need IRF care to return to your prior level of 
independence. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says based on Medicare guidelines, the requested IRF 
services do not meet the requirements for approval. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically 
reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested IRF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found that the complexity of your nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. 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: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the specimen validity testing provided on January 21, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the testing. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this testing is not 
separately payable. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers performing validity testing on urine 
specimens utilized for drug testing should not separately bill the validity testing. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for 
coverage of the testing have not been met. Specifically, we find that the testing described by the billed code is 
considered specimen validity testing which is not separately payable.  
 
 
 
  
Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the specimen validity testing provided on January 
21, 2022.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 83789 billed for date of service February 22, 
2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 83789. You say that you disagree with the denial. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says payment for code 83789 is bundled into payment for code 80307. 
 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 83789 
is a column II code to column I code 80307. This claim has not been billed with an appropriate modifier to 
bypass the edit. The -59 modifier is not supported as a separate and distinct procedural service. 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 83789 billed for date of service February 22, 2022.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the Intracept procedure. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the Intracept procedure. You say that the Intracept procedure is medically 
necessary and the most effective treatment at this time. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the clinical 
value and effectiveness of the Intracept procedure in the setting of vertebrogenic low back pain have not been 
demonstrated in the peer-reviewed literature. The Plan says that more research is needed to show safety and 
efficacy of the procedure. 
 
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 Intracept procedure. Our reviewer 
says that the Intracept procedure is not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our 
physician reviewer found documentation is lacking regarding reasonably detailed and/or evidenced findings 
supportive of the spinal vertebral bodies as being the overwhelming primary generators of the enrollees 
chronic persistent pain. Documentation does not support actual formal surgical ablation of pre-designated 
basivertebral nerves as being medically necessary and/or reasonable at this time. There is no compelling 
rationale presented or extenuating circumstances noted to support the medical necessity of this request as an exception. Therefore, the requested Intracept intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation 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 Intracept procedure have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve the Intracept procedure.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the knee orthosis (CPT code L1851). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the knee orthosis. You say that the orthosis is necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the Medicare rules have not been met. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we 
decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the knee orthosis have not been met. Review of the file shows that 
the provider is requesting the brace to reduce the enrollee's pain and reduce opioid intake. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the knee orthosis (CPT code L1851).
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve external mobile cardiovascular telemetry with 
electrocardiographic recording (CPT code 93228). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the service. You say that the service is medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee's records do not show the results of a standard, 24-hour 
traditional heart monitor, or why using that monitor might not be enough to study the enrollee's heart and their 
symptoms. 
 
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 service. Our reviewer says that the 
requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our physician 
reviewer found the review has determined that the items/services at issue in this case are 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 service have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve external mobile cardiovascular telemetry with electrocardiographic recording (CPT code 
93228).
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the Vertiflex superion device placement surgery (CPT 
code(s): 22869 and 22870). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the surgery. You say that the service is medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says medical studies have not proven that the service(s) or procedure(s) is 
helpful for treatment of the enrollee's health problem. 
 
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 surgery. Our reviewer says that the 
requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our physician 
reviewer found the Vertiflex device is experimental. More research is needed. 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 surgery have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the Vertiflex 
superion device placement surgery (CPT code(s): 22869 and 22870).
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided on March 10, 2022, to May 18, 2022, 
by an out-of-network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit. You say that you would like to request reconsideration of the 
denied claim and that you didn't know the provider was OON. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the 
provider is out-of-network, and it was determined these services can be received in-network. 
 
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 office visit provided on March 10, 2022, to 
May 18, 2022, by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
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 these services are medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the medical criteria for an IRF admission 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 clinical documentation shows that the enrollee has comorbidities that would benefit 
from close medical supervision and encephalopathy can be an IRF compliant diagnosis however evaluating therapists recommend intermittent skilled therapy thus IRF criteria not 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 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: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the general health panel provided on June 12, 2020. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the services. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this is not a covered 
benefit. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that code 80050 (general health panel) is considered a non-
covered code. 
 
You have requested payment for services billed under code 80050. Medicare does not cover or pay for services 
billed under this code. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the general health panel 
provided on June 12, 2020.