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 stay is medically necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the stay is not medically necessary based on IRF 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 documentation does not support necessity for admission to an IRF. The 
complexity of the enrollee's nursing, rehabilitation, and medical, needs (combined complexity) does not require 
an acute hospital inpatient rehabilitation stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitative care. The 
enrollee clearly needs to be in acute hospital care and not in an IRF. While the enrollee may benefit from 
physical therapy (PT), and occupational therapy (OT), the enrollee's rehabilitation needs can be provided 
currently in the acute 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 inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a Freestyle Libre. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a Freestyle Libre. 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. Medicare rules say that for Medicare to consider coverage and payment 
for any item or service, the information submitted by the supplier or provider must corroborate the 
documentation in the beneficiary's medical documentation and confirm that Medicare coverage criteria have 
been met. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that there is insufficient 
information in the record to determine if Medicare rules for coverage of a Freestyle Libre have been met. Specifically, medical records were requested but not received. Medical necessity cannot be established without 
this information. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a Freestyle Libre.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for suture of small intestine (enterorrhaphy) for perforated ulcer, 
diverticulum, wound, injury or rupture; multiple perforations rendered on December 26, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the services. You say that this should be paid for. The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says the records do not support the services billed. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate CPT code. 
 
In this case, the CPT Code Manual definition of code 44603 is "Suture of small intestine (enterorrhaphy) for 
perforated ulcer, diverticulum, wound, injury or rupture; multiple perforations." 
 
We asked our coder to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to determine if the 
Plan was correct in denying the request to pay for the services. Our reviewer says that the services at issue in this case were not supported by the medical records. Our reviewer found that the medical records provided 
includes documentation that CPT 44120, an enterectomy, resection of small intestine of a single resection and 
anastomosis was performed on the same day as CPT 44603. In this case, the medical records provided does not 
include sufficient documentation to validate procedure 44603 as a distinct/separate service that was unrelated 
to procedure 44120. It was performed as standard of medical/surgical practice, therefore it is inappropriate to 
use a modifier to unbundle the service and no additional payment is allowed. 
 
We looked at this coder's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of the services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pay for suture of small intestine (enterorrhaphy) for perforated ulcer, diverticulum, wound, injury or 
rupture; multiple perforations rendered on December 26, 2022.
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 due to your medical conditions the services are 
medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says continuation of SNF is not medically 
necessary and does not meet Medicare guidelines.  
 
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 documentation shows that you are functioning at a home care level and do not need 
to be in a skilled facility. Your tracheostomy and PEG tube may reasonably be managed at home. SNF criteria 
is 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 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: 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 the enrollee is not ready to go home. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says this 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 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 and/or skilled therapy on an inpatient basis in a skilled nursing 
facility (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 skilled nursing facility (SNF) care.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for methadone treatment provided on October 3, 2022, by an 
out-of-network (OON) provider.  
 
You asked the Plan to pay for methadone treatment. You say that this was medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says this was not authorized. 
 
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 methadone treatment provided on October 3, 
2022, by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: SNF
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the continuation of skilled nursing facility (SNF) care 
from June 9, 2023, forward. 
 You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF care. You say that the stay is medically necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the stay is not medically necessary based on SNF criteria. 
 
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 is functioning at a home care level. The enrollee has no daily skilled 
therapy needs. The enrollee is able to progress with repetitive exercise without input from a skilled therapist 
per chapter 8, and clinical practice standards 
 
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 the continuation of skilled nursing facility (SNF) care from June 9, 2023, forward.
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 the enrollee needs SNF care as they have cognitive 
issues and are unable to be left alone.  The Plan denied your request. The Plan says SNF services are 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 the enrollee had a stroke. The enrollee has impaired cognition and impaired speech. 
She is able to walk and transfer at a stand-by-assist level. The enrollee does not require daily skilled therapy. 
The enrollee is functioning at a home care level, although she requires supervision. The enrollee's needs are 
primarily custodial.  
 
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: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve percutaneous laminotomy/laminectomy (0275T). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve percutaneous laminotomy/laminectomy. You say that the services are 
necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee is not participating in a Medicare clinical 
trial.  
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that effective for dates of service specified below, the 
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has determined that PILD will be covered by Medicare 
when provided in a clinical study under section 1862(a)(1)(E)of the Social Security Act (the Act) through 
Coverage with Evidence Development (CED) for beneficiaries with LSS who are enrolled in an approved 
clinical study that meets the criteria. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for 
coverage of percutaneous laminotomy/laminectomy have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve percutaneous laminotomy/laminectomy (0275T).
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve an Intracept procedure (64628). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve an Intracept procedure. You say that the services are necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says medical necessity has not been established. Therefore, coverage criteria 
have not been met. 
 
 
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 an 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 documentation of an adequate trial and failure of bracing. More 
conservative measures are 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 an Intracept procedure have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve an Intracept procedure (64628).
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the chemotherapy drug, Doxil.  
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Doxil. You say that the requested drug is part of a recommended treatment 
regimen for the enrollee's medical condition. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the requested drug is 
not medically accepted. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare may pay for unlabeled uses for anti-cancer 
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 Doxil. Our reviewer says that the 
requested drug, Doxil, does not meet the criteria for approval. Our physician reviewer found Doxil is not FDA-
approved for the enrollees diagnosis and is not supported by one of the major drug compendia or by clinical 
research that appears in a CMS-approved medical journal. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Doxil have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to 
pre-approve the chemotherapy drug, Doxil.
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 stay is medically necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the stay is not medically necessary based on IRF 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 documentation does not support necessity for admission to an IRF. The 
complexity of the enrollee's nursing, rehabilitation, and medical, needs (combined complexity) does not require 
an acute hospital inpatient rehabilitation stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitative care. While the 
enrollee may benefit from physical therapy (PT), and occupational therapy (OT), the enrollee's rehabilitation 
needs can be provided in a lower intensity and alternate setting such as in a skilled nursing facility (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 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: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve positron emission tomography (PET) with concurrently 
acquired computed tomography (CT) from skull base to mid thigh (78815). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the PET scan. You say that the service is medically necessary for the 
enrollee to rule out other issues causing the severely elevated coronary levels.  The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says there are no biopsies or lab work that shows the testing is needed.  
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that PET scans are covered only when they are 
medically 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 the PET scan. Our physician reviewer 
found  the enrollee does not have an indication for which a PET Scan can be covered at this time. There is no 
known diagnosis of malignancy and no comment on the computed tomography (CT) scan done for chest pain.  
 
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 PET scan have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve positron emission tomography (PET) with concurrently acquired computed tomography 
(CT) from skull base to mid thigh (78815).
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Pregabalin. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the medication. You say that the medication is necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the medication is not covered as a medical benefit under the Plan. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare Part B generally does not pay for self-
administered drugs. The self-administered drugs requested here are not among the types which are covered by 
Medicare Part B. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Pregabalin.   
Benefits for the medication 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: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve skilled nursing facility (SNF) care. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF care. You say that you do not have the help you need at home. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says that this 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 considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found the records show that you are functionally impaired and below a home care level 
following a hip fracture. Daily skilled therapy is indicated per clinical practice standards. 
 
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 been met. The Plan must continue coverage for the SNF skilled 
service until such time as the enrollee no longer needs the service and proper notice has been issued, or the 
100-day Medicare benefit is exhausted. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pre-approve skilled nursing 
facility (SNF) care.  
 
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: Lab
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pay for a drug screening provided on October 20, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for a drug screening. You say that you are requesting reconsideration of the denied 
claim. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that this service was not authorized with an out-of-network 
provider. 
 
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 the correct Evidence of Coverage (EOC) for the date of 
service in this case. Without the correct EOC we are unable to determine if the claim was processed correctly 
according to the enrollee's Plan benefits. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pay for a drug screening 
provided on October 20, 2022.  
 
If the Plan does not agree with our decision, they can ask us to open a case again. We only open a case again 
if we believe there was a mistake or if there is new information to review. The Plan has to show us the mistake 
and/or send us the new information. This does not happen often. If we decide to open the case again, we will 
send you a letter.