Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the genetic testing provided on October 11, 2022, billed with 
codes 81351, 81405, and 81406. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the genetic testing billed. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says panel testing should be billed using one CPT code on the claim. 
 
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 
October 11, 2022, billed with codes 81351, 81405, and 81406.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for the inpatient hospital stay provided form 
April 3, 2022, to April 6, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for the inpatient hospital stay. You say that you paid a bill when 
you left the hospital and were told you had paid in full. 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 $492 
copayment per day for days 1-4 of each inpatient hospital stay. Your contract with the Plan also clearly says that you then pay a $0 copayment per day for any additional days of the same inpatient hospital stay. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $492 copayment per day for days 1-3 of the inpatient hospital stay. This 
item/service falls within the inpatient hospital care benefit category. You have not been asked to pay after day 
three or for the day you were discharged. You have been asked to pay a total of $1,476 for the inpatient 
hospital stay ($492 copayment per day x 3 days = $1,476). This means that you have been asked to pay the 
correct amount based on your contract with the Plan. This cost sharing is a contractual obligation you agreed to 
pay when you enrolled in the Plan. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment 
for the inpatient hospital stay provided form April 3, 2022, to April 6, 2022.
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 would like to request reconsideration of the 
denied authorization. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) 
services you are requesting 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 the complexity of the enrollee's nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not 
require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The enrollee 
was admitted for lumbar spine surgery. Medical problems are stable. 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. There is not a 
reasonable expectation that this 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: Home Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the home health services provided on February 27, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the home health services. You say that you would like the Plan to reconsider 
their denial of payment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services are not covered as billed. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
 
We looked at the file and the rules. The claim was billed with a type of bill 324. Based on this information, we 
decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the services provided have not been met. Therefore, we decided 
that the Plan does not have to pay for the home health services provided on February 27, 2023.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve a CT scan of the chest. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the CT scan of the chest. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that 
the CT scan of the chest is not medically necessary. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that CT 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 CT scan of the chest. Our reviewer 
says that the CT scan of the chest is medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found that the enrollee has 
ascites, elevated CA-125 (cancer antigen 125) and pelvic mass. These findings are very suspicious for ovarian 
malignancy. Therefore, the requested CT scan of the chest is reasonable to look for metastatic disease and can 
easily be added to the already approved CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis. 
 
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 CT scan of the chest have been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has 
to pre-approve a CT scan of the chest.  
 
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: 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 would like to request reconsideration of the 
denied authorization. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) 
services you are requesting 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 the complexity of your nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not require an 
acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. You were admitted for 
back pain and pelvic fractures. Medical problems are stable. There are no complex nursing or rehabilitation 
needs. You do 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. 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 pre-approve MTHFR (5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase) 
gene analysis, common variants (81291).  
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve MTHFR gene analysis, common variants. You say that this testing is 
medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says a review of the authoritative medical 
literature indicates that genetic testing of MTHFR does not display analytical and clinical validity and utility in 
the evaluation of thromboembolism.  
 
The Plan follows Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that this testing is covered when the enrollee displays 
clinical features of an associated disease, the results of the test directly impact treatment and a definitive 
diagnosis remains uncertain after history, physical examination, pedigree analysis, genetic counseling, and 
completion of conventional diagnostic studies. 
 
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 MTHFR gene analysis, common 
variants. Our reviewer says that the criteria are not met for this testing. Our physician reviewer found that the 
enrollee in this case has a history of a cortical vein thrombosis of the right parietal lobe for which her provider 
is concerned about a hypercoagulable state. The provided records do not clarify how the result of the test will 
directly impact the treatment being delivered to the beneficiary. Provided records in this case do not include 
results of a pedigree analysis, genetic counseling, and results of other diagnostic studies including the F2 gene 
analysis, 20210G>A variant and F5 gene analysis, Leiden variant. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of MTHFR gene analysis, common variants have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve MTHFR (5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase) gene 
analysis, common variants (81291).
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 will benefit from inpatient rehabilitation 
to improve functional mobility. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not meet the 
criteria for admission. 
 
 
 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 are no services available at the LTACH that the enrollee requires that are not 
available at the current health care setting being offered by the health plan. 
 
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 laboratory services (U0003, G2023) provided on 
February 17, 2023, by an out-of-network (OON) provider.  
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the laboratory services . The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this service 
is not covered when provided OON. 
 
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 the laboratory services (U0003, G2023) provided 
on February 17, 2023, 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. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not 
meet all the requirements. Services needed may be provided safely 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 the complexity of the enrollee's nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not 
require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation 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: 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 would like to request reconsideration of the 
denied authorization. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) 
services you are requesting 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 the complexity of the enrollee's nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not 
require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The enrollee 
was admitted for congestive heart failure. Medical problems are stable. 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. There is not a 
reasonable expectation that this 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: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the upgraded electronics (E2311, E2313, E2377).  
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the upgraded electronics. You say that you are requesting reconsideration of 
the denied authorization. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the upgraded electronics are not 
medically necessary. 
 
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 upgraded electronics. Our reviewer 
says that the requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary to meet the 
enrollee's needs/ Our physician reviewer found that the enrollee has adequate strength to manage the standard 
power drive controls. 
 
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 upgraded electronics have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve the upgraded electronics (E2311, E2313, E2377).
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve long term acute care hospital (LTACH) services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the LTACH services. You say that the services are medically necessary.  
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee is receiving the appropriate inpatient care and does 
not require transfer to a LTACH.  
 
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 there is no documentation provided indicating medical necessity for admission to a 
LTACH. The enrollee is receiving appropriate care at the present acute care hospital. 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 long term acute care hospital (LTACH) services.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for panoramic x-ray (D0330) provided on November 16, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for panoramic x-ray. You say that this should be covered. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says this is not a covered service. 
 
Medicare generally does not cover dental services. However, the Plan offers a dental benefit that exceeds 
Medicare coverage. For that reason, the Plans coverage rules apply in this case. 
 
Though the Plan offers a dental benefit in excess of Medicare coverage, the requested items or services are not 
among those covered under this benefit. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for 
panoramic x-ray (D0330) provided on November 16, 2022.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for saline infusion (J7050) provided on September 15, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the saline infusion. You say that this service was medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the billed service is not separately payable. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate CPT code. 
 
We find that CPT code J7050 is not supported in the medical record. Specifically, the billed code is not 
separately payable. Saline infusion used to administer another drug is included in the base drug administration 
service (J2785). Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the saline infusion have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for saline infusion (J7050) 
provided on September 15, 2022.