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 you need intensive therapy before you return home. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says you condition does not meet Medicare guidelines for admission to 
an IRF.  
 
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. Your 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 therapy 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: 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 are in extreme pain and need therapy to return to 
your prior level of function. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says an IRF admission is not medically 
necessary.  
 
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 your medical problems are stable and there are no complex nursing or 
rehabilitation needs. While the medical record supports a need for physical or occupational therapy, there is no 
documented need for intensive rehabilitation services. Medically necessary care can be provided in a different 
level of care.  
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Cimzia Kit 200 milligrams. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the medication. You say that the enrollee has been on this medication and is 
stable. 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 Cimzia Kit 200 milligrams.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for evaluation and management services (procedure codes 99223 
and 99233) rendered from April 3, 2023, to April 11, 2023. 
 
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 denied codes remain not supported. 
 
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 the denied codes is: 
 
CPT 99223: 
 
Initial hospital inpatient or observation care, per day, for the evaluation and management of a patient, which requires a medically appropriate history and/or examination and high level of medical decision making. When 
using total time on the date of the encounter for code selection, 75 minutes must be met or exceeded 
 
CPT 99233: 
 
Subsequent hospital inpatient or observation care, per day, for the evaluation and management of a patient, 
which requires a medically appropriate history and/or examination and high level of medical decision making. 
When using total time on the date of the encounter for code selection, 50 minutes must be met or exceeded 
 
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 documentation supports an 
appropriate exam, but not an appropriate history or medical decision making of high level, or that 75 minutes 
were spent, so CPT 99223 is not supported. 
 
Additionally, the documentation supports an appropriate exam, but not an appropriate history or medical 
decision making of high level, or that 50 minutes were spent, so CPT 99233 is not supported. 
 
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 evaluation and management services (procedure codes 99223 and 99233) rendered from April 
3, 2023, to April 11, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure codes S9131, S9129, and S9123 billed for date of 
service March 10, 2023 to March 30, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure codes S9131, S9129, and S9123. You say that you disagree with the 
denial. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the billed codes are invalid for Medicare purposes.  
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate procedure code. 
 We find that procedure codes S9131, S9129, and S9123 have a Status Indicator of I on the Physician Fee 
Schedule. This means that procedure codes S9131, S9129, and S9123 are not valid for Medicare purposes. 
Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of procedure codes S9131, S9129, and 
S9123 have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure codes S9131, 
S9129, and S9123 billed for date of service March 10, 2023 to March 30, 2023.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the laboratory services billed with codes 85045 and 87086 
for April 13, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for these services. You say that you disagree with the denial. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says there is no valid physician order. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that lab testing generally must be ordered by a 
physician who has furnished a consultation or treats an enrollee for a specific medical problem.  
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. The file does not contain documentation of an established 
relationship between the enrollee and the ordering provider. Without a record showing that this provider is treating the enrollee, the criteria for coverage of this testing have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the 
Plan does not have to pay for the laboratory services billed with codes 85045 and 87086 for April 13, 2023.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for lab services provided on January 23, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the lab services. You did not provide a specific argument with your appeal 
request. 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 January 23, 2022.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for parenteral nutrition solution and related supplies provided 
from November 1, 2022, to November 30, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for parenteral nutrition solution and related supplies. You say that you have billed 
the items at issue correctly. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says rules for payment have not been met. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that the provider, supplier, or beneficiary, as 
appropriate, must furnish to the intermediary or carrier sufficient information to determine whether payment is 
due and the amount of payment.  
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 parenteral nutrition solution and 
related supplies have been met. Specifically, the provided records do not include compounding or mixing 
reports for the items provided in this case. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for 
parenteral nutrition solution and related supplies provided from November 1, 2022, to November 30, 2022.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for lab services provided on January 31, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the lab services. You say that this service was medically necessary. 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 January 31, 2022.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for lab services provided on April 11, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the lab services. You say that you have provided medical records to support 
payment. 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 April 11, 2023.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a SPECT procedure (78830). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a SPECT procedure. You say that the requested service is a medical 
necessity for the enrollee. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the requested service is 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 a SPECT procedure. Our reviewer says 
that the requested service is not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our physician 
reviewer found that the enrollee has resting tremors. The record provided does not document one of the 
enumerated conditions for which coverage for the requested service may be available under the rules. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of a SPECT procedure have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve a SPECT procedure (78830).
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission 
and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that the IRF admission is medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not meet the criteria for IRF 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 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 
does not require treatment by multiple therapies, including either physical therapy or occupational therapy, and 
an intensive rehabilitation therapy program. 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 as 
medically necessary care can be provided in a different level of care. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: 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 is expected to participate and benefit 
from 15 hours of therapy a week. You say that the enrollee requires daily physician oversight to actively 
manage medical conditions and comorbidities to optimize recovery and avoid re-hospitalization during 
intensive rehabilitation. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says an IRF admission is not medically 
necessary.  
 The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically 
reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested IRF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found that the enrollees medical problems are stable and there are no complex nursing or 
rehabilitation needs. While the medical record supports a need for physical or occupational therapy, there is no 
documented need for intensive rehabilitation services. Medically necessary care can be provided in a different 
level of care.  
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the laboratory services rendered on April 7, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for these services. You say that you disagree with the denial. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says the services were not billed correctly. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that a urine PCR panel cannot be unbundled and billed as 
individual components. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. The file shows that the urine PCR panel was not billed as a single 
unit of service. 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 pay for the laboratory services rendered on 
April 7, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of genicular nerve 
branches (64624). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve RFA of genicular nerve branches. You say that the requested service is a 
medical necessity for the enrollee. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the requested service is 
experimental/investigational. 
 
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 RFA of genicular nerve branches. Our 
reviewer says that the requested services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. 
Our physician reviewer found that the requested procedure is considered experimental/investigational. The 
procedure is the subject of ongoing clinical trials.  
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of RFA of genicular nerve branches have not been met. Therefore, we decided that 
the Plan does not have to pre-approve radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of genicular nerve branches (64624).
Appeal type: Step-Therapy
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Supartz. 
 You asked the Plan to pre-approve Supartz. You say that the enrollee did well with the previous Supartz 
injection, and the pain in their right knee was controlled for over a year. The Plan denied your request. The 
Plan says that the step therapy requirements have not been 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 Supartz. Our reviewer says that Supartz 
is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found that there is no indication that the enrollee has tried 
and failed the Plan's required drugs Durolane, Gelsyn-3, Synvisc and Synvisc-One. Also, there is no indication 
that the Plan's required drugs would likely be less effective or likely have adverse effects for the enrollee. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Supartz. have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve Supartz.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the genicular nerve block. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the genicular nerve block. You say that the enrollee is in a lot of pain. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says the genicular nerve block is 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 genicular nerve block. Our reviewer 
says that the genicular nerve block is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found that the genicular 
nerve block is considered an experimental and investigational therapy. 
 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 genicular nerve block have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the 
Plan does not have to pre-approve the genicular nerve block.