Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
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 the admission to an IRF 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 the enrollee does not require the intensity of services provided at an IRF. 
Specifically, the enrollee is not shown to require, or to be able to perform, fifteen hours per week of 
rehabilitative services with regular physician evaluation. The enrollees care needs can be met at 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 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 inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission 
and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that the services are necessary. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says based on the documentation provided, 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 the enrollee had made good progress at skilled facility posy by-pass. She had a 
decline in function with confusion when she developed pneumonia. She improved promptly in the acute hospital without significant therapy as her confusion cleared. By her own performance she responded well to 
standard post acute care without admission to IRF. She did not have complex needs and had no medical or 
neurological barriers to rehabilitation requiring frequent oversight. She did have a decline in function during 
the acute stay but the evidence is she does not require intensive rehabilitation to regain function. 
 
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: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a dermatology consultation to be provided by an out-of-
network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a dermatology consultation. You say that your dermatologist for the past 10 
years is no longer able to treat your condition and recommended you see a different provider. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the services can be provided by in-network providers. The Plan supplied a list of 
providers that can render these 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 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 
a dermatology consultation to be provided by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve additional non-emergency transportation. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve additional transportation. You say that you have dialysis three times per 
week, and are currently having to pay out of pocket for trips because authorization for additional transportation 
is being denied. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says from January 28, 2022, to August 02, 2022, you 
utilized 60 of the allotted 60 one-way trips, thus exhausting your benefit. 
 
Medicare does not cover transport in a vehicle that is not an ambulance. However, the Plan offers a 
transportation benefit that exceeds Medicare coverage. For that reason, the Plans coverage rules apply in this 
case. The Plan covers a maximum of up to 60 one-way trips per year.  
 We looked at your request, the records in the case file, and the rules. Based on this information, we decided 
that you have exhausted the Plan maximum benefit for coverage of routine transportation. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve additional non-emergency transportation.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve periodontal scalings and root planings (D4341) for all 
four quadrants. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the dental services. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says dental 
services from an out-of-network provider are not covered by your supplemental 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. 
 
You are requesting dental services from an out-of-network provider. Though the Plan offers a dental benefit in 
excess of Medicare coverage, the requested items or services are not covered under this benefit when received 
from an out-of-network provider. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve periodontal 
scalings and root planings (D4341) for all four quadrants.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Zilretta. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Zilretta. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the requested drug is not medically necessary. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare pays for a drug or biological only if it is safe 
and effective and otherwise reasonable and necessary.  
 
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 Zilretta. Our reviewer says that the 
documentation does not support that Zilretta is medically reasonable or necessary. Our physician reviewer 
found the enrollee has right knee pain related to osteoarthritis. The enrollee received a Zilretta injection which 
helped with pain. There is no documentation that the Zilretta at issue in this case meets Medicare criteria for 
medically reasonable and necessary. The efficacy and safety of repeat administration of Zilretta have not been 
demonstrated. Therefore, the enrollee does not meet criteria for the requested drug. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Zilretta have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to 
pre-approve Zilretta.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Gel-one (J7326). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Gel-one. You say that you believe it is medically necessary for the enrollee 
to proceed with Gel-one injections. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the medication must be 
supplied by the medical provider or medical facility. The Plan also says that the office said Gel-one will be 
supplied by a pharmacy. 
 
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 Gel-one (J7326).  
 
Benefits for Gel-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: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Moderate sedation services to be provided by an out-of-
network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Moderate sedation services. You say that the services requested are 
medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services requested are not medically 
necessary. 
 
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 
Moderate sedation services to be provided 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 requested admission to an IRF is medically 
necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the requested admission to an IRF does not meet 
criteria. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically 
reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section. 
 
 
 
 
 We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested IRF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found the complexity of the enrollees nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs do not 
require an acute rehab hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The 
enrollee does not require treatment by multiple therapies, including either physical therapy or occupational 
therapy, at an intensive rehabilitation therapy program. The enrollee continues to have a need for skilled 
therapy with ongoing safety concerns and a potential for functional improvement however, the documentation 
doesnt support that he would meet criteria for admission to an acute inpatient rehabilitation facility. There is 
no indication that the enrollee would require skilled rehabilitation in an IRF, participating in rehab services 15 
hours a week, under the supervision of a physician with at least 3 visits weekly to regain or maintain his 
functional status. He can receive further services at 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 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 elevating legrests (K0195). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve elevating legrests. You say that the services are necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says based on the documentation provided, coverage criteria has not been met. 
 
The Plan follows Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that elevating legrests (E0990, K0046, K0047, K0053, 
K0195) are covered if specific criteria are met. 
 
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 elevating legrests. Our reviewer says 
that the services are not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the documentation does not 
support that the enrollee requires a standard wheelchair with elevating leg rests. The documentation indicates 
the enrollee has a mobility deficit that interfered with mobility related activities of daily living (MRADLs) in 
the home. The documentation does not reveal that the enrollee is unable to help her mobility deficit. The 
documentation does not support that the enrollee can safely maneuver the requested wheelchair in the home 
given her cognitive deficits and lack of an objective home assessment. 
 We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of elevating legrests have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does 
not have to pre-approve elevating legrests (K0195).
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve Botox injection (J0585). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Botox. You say that the enrollee has tried and failed Myrbetriq. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says that the enrollee has not tried and failed an anticholinergic medication. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare may pay for unlabeled uses for FDA-
approved drugs if they are medically accepted as safe and effective or appropriate for the particular use.  
 
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 Botox. Our reviewer says that the 
requested Botox injection is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the provided 
documentation does not indicate that the requested use of Botox is FDA-approved for the enrollees diagnosis. 
The reviewer found that the requested use is supported by one of the major drug compendia or by clinical 
research that appears in a CMS-approved medical journal (see appendix for list of CMS-approved journals). 
Therefore, the reviewer found that the Botox injection is 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 Botox have been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pre-approve 
Botox injection (J0585).  
 
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: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve upper and lower dentures. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the dentures. You say that you would like to replace your upper denture that 
was lost, and remake your lower denture because it does not fit well. The Plan denied your request. The Plan 
says that there are no medical needs identified. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare health plans must make reasonable and 
diligent efforts to gather and forward to the IRE information regarding its decision to deny coverage or 
payment. 
 
The Plan has not made reasonable and diligent efforts to gather and forward to us information regarding their 
decision to deny your request. The Plan did not provide a copy of the applicable 2022 Evidence of Coverage 
for this case. We asked for this document, but it was not provided to us. Without this information we cannot 
determine that the Plan's coverage rules support the denial of payment in this case, or that the enrollee has been 
adequately notified of the Plan's coverage rules and benefits. Consequently, the Plan has not substantiated their 
denial of payment in this case. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pre-approve upper and lower 
dentures.  
 
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: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Prolia. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Prolia. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the requested drug does not meet step therapy criteria. 
 
 
 Medicare covers Part B medications when they are reasonable and necessary but allows health plans to 
implement step therapy criteria. The Plan's contract indicates that it has implemented such criteria for certain 
Part B medications. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve Prolia. Our reviewer says that the 
documentation does not support that the requested drug meets step therapy criteria. Our physician reviewer 
found the enrollee has osteoporosis. The documentation does not support that the enrollee has a history of 
osteoporosis-related fracture or tried and failed zoledronic acid. The documentation does not support that 
zoledronic acid would likely be less effective and/or likely have adverse effects for the enrollee. Therefore, the 
enrollee does not meet criteria for the requested drug. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Prolia have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to 
pre-approve Prolia.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to be provided by 
an out-of-network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). You say that you would like to request 
reconsideration of the denied claim. 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 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 
magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to be provided by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Prolia. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Prolia. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the requested drug does not meet step therapy criteria. 
 
 
 Medicare covers Part B medications when they are reasonable and necessary but allows health plans to 
implement step therapy criteria. The Plan's contract indicates that it has implemented such criteria for certain 
Part B medications. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve Prolia. Our reviewer says that the 
documentation does not support that the requested drug meets step therapy criteria. Our physician reviewer 
found the enrollee has osteoporosis. The documentation does not support that the enrollee has a history of 
osteoporosis-related fracture or that the enrollee has tried and failed zoledronic acid. The documentation does 
not support that zoledronic acid would likely be less effective and/or likely have adverse effects for the 
enrollee. Therefore, the enrollee does not meet criteria for the requested drug. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Prolia have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to 
pre-approve Prolia.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a maxillary partial denture (D5211) and a mandibular 
partial denture (D5212). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the dentures. You say that you would like to appeal these services. 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 date of service April 14, 2021. 
Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a maxillary partial denture (D5211) and a 
mandibular partial denture (D5212).