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 believe the enrollee's medical management and 
rehabilitation needs require an IRF stay and close physician supervision. The Plan denied your request. The 
Plan says criteria for admission to the acute IRF setting have 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 complexity of the enrollee's nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs do not 
require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. 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 sacroiliac joint (SIJ) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) 
(64625). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve SIJ RFA. 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 SIJ Denervation (also called Radiofrequency 
Ablation or RFA) is not considered reasonable and necessary. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for 
coverage of SIJ RFA have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve 
sacroiliac joint (SIJ) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (64625).
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute IRF admission and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that the clinical summary and clinical documentation 
support this request. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says based on Medicare guidelines, the IRF 
services requested 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 enrollees nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs do not 
require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The enrollee 
was admitted for rib fractures after a fall. Medical problems are stable. There are no complex nursing or 
rehabilitation needs. While the medical records support 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 the enrollee will be able to fully participate in 
and benefit from the intensive rehabilitation therapy program provided in an IRF. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve acute IRF admission and services.
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 services are medically necessary for the enrollee 
to increase their strength. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not meet the criteria 
for admission to a SNF.  
 
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 or skilled therapy needs to 
address chronic functional loss. 
 
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 pre-approve Trulicity. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the medication. You say that you would like the Plan to reconsider their 
denial. 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 Trulicity.  
 
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: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Farxiga. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the medication. You say that the requested medication is necessary for the 
enrollee. 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 Farxiga.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Lupron Depot. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Lupron Depot. You say that this drug is necessary for the enrollee's 
treatment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the requested use of Lupron Depot is not approved by 
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the enrollee's condition. 
 
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 Lupron Depot. Our reviewer says that 
the requested use of Lupron Depot is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the record 
indicates that the enrollee has a diagnosis of benign prostatic hypertrophy. The Food and Drug Administration 
has not stated that the requested drug is indicated for the enrollee's condition. The Medicare approved drug 
compendia do not contain a supportive citation for the use of the requested drug in the enrollee's clinical situation. Therefore, the reviewer found that the requested use of Lupron Depot is not medically reasonable or 
necessary. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Lupron Depot have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve Lupron Depot.
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 currently meets inpatient rehabilitation 
criteria. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not meet inpatient rehabilitation 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 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: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the Cala Trio nerve stimulator. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the Cala Trio device. You say that this is necessary to treat your tremors, 
and you were told that Medicare covers this.  The Plan denied your request. The Plan says there is no 
regulation indicating Medicare coverage, and the literature does not support this device. 
 
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 Cala Trio device. Our reviewer says 
that the requested item is not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our physician 
reviewer found there is insufficient evidence in the literature that this device is effective for the enrollee. The 
requested device is not the standard of care for this enrollee's tremor according to current guidelines.  
 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 Cala Trio device have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve the Cala Trio nerve stimulator.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve dermatology services to be provided by an out-of-
network (OON) provider.  
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve OON services. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says there are in-
network providers available. 
 
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 services at issue in this appeal. We found no exception that would require the 
Plan to pre-approve these OON services. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve 
dermatology services to be provided by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a home ventilator. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a home ventilator. You say that the patient has had a home ventilator for 
years. The patient's lungs are not working efficiently and they need this item to blow off CO2 in lungs and 
create positive pressure stents to open their airway. Other devices do not meet the patient's needs. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the patient's needs can be met with a bilevel positive airway pressure 
(BiPAP) device with average volume-assured pressure support (AVAPS). 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that ventilators may be covered when they are medically 
necessary for patients who have neuromuscular disease, thoracic restrictive diseases, and chronic respiratory 
failure due to COPD. 
 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 home ventilator. Our reviewer says 
that a home ventilator is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the enrollee is a 72-year-old 
male with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). On May 1, 2023, 
he was seen by his provider and at that time nebulized breathing treatments and supplemental oxygen were 
recommended for management of his COPD. On June 1, 2023, a standard written order for a non-invasive 
ventilator was placed by the provider, with instructions for it to be used exclusively in the average volume 
assured pressure support (AVAPS) mode. It has been documented that he has tried and failed BiPAP AVAPS 
in the hospital with persistent hypercapnia on multiple settings however the compliance data shows that he is 
not using the non-invasive ventilator (NIV) and there are no arterial blood gas readings available documenting 
failure of BiPAP. With this request for continuation of the NIV, there was no change in the order for the 
device, or in the settings. The documentation indicates that this device is being used solely in AVAPS mode, 
and thus it is being used solely as a respiratory assist device. The documentation provided does not fully 
support that the use of a BiPAP device with AVAPS would not meet the patient's current medical needs or has 
been found to be ineffective in the home setting. As there are no arterial blood gases available to document 
failure of BiPAP with AVAPS. 
 
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 home ventilator have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does 
not have to pre-approve a home ventilator.
Appeal type: Step-Therapy
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the Leqvio injections. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the injections. You say that the enrollee is not open to self-injections with 
Repatha. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee did not meet the step therapy requirements. 
 
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 the injections. Our physician reviewer 
found that the Plan requires a trial of Repatha before they will approve Leqvio. Our physician reviewer found 
that based on the medical records provided there is no indication that the enrollee has tried and failed the 
required drug. Our physician reviewer found that there is no indication that the Plans required drug would 
likely be less effective and/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 the injections have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve the Leqvio injections.
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 the services are medically necessary and were 
denied due to lack of timely information. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that ongoing skilled care 
can be provided in an alternative setting on an intermittent basis. 
 
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 that you are having difficulty with lymphedema and current therapists recommend 
continued daily skilled therapy. Clinical documentation shows that you have had had lymph edema, urinary 
tract infection and other medical barriers. You would continue to benefit from frequent skilled nursing 
assessment. Clinical documentation shows that you require continued daily skilled services.  
 
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: 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 due to enrollee's many setbacks, LTACH 
level of care is the only appropriate and safe option for member at this time. The Plan denied your request. The 
Plan says the enrollee does not meet the requirements for approval.  
 
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 the enrollee does not require services at the LTACH that are not available at the acute 
care hospital where they are currently receiving care. All medically necessary care is being provided in the 
current acute care 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 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 pre-approve each subsequent 15 minute increment (D9223 x2). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the dental services represented by D9222, D9223 and D7250. You say that 
you need to clarify that the first two sedations do not require pre-authorization so they don't charge you. You 
also say that you need this surgery for your well-being with your various conditions, including diabetes.  
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says your benefit for the deep sedation/general anesthesia - each 
subsequent 15 minute increment (D9223 x2) 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 Plan's 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 each subsequent 15 minute increment (D9222) was exhausted on the 
appealed claim. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve each subsequent 15 minute 
increment (D9223 x2).
Appeal type: Outpatient Therapies
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for physical therapy services provided on February 6, 2023, by 
an out-of-network (OON) provider.  
 
You asked the Plan to pay for physical therapy services. You say that this is supported in the records. 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 physical therapy services provided on February 6, 
2023, by an out-of-network (OON) provider.