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 physical therapy and occupational therapy 
recommends inpatient rehabilitation for intensive therapy to promote healing physically and mentally and to 
regain independence. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the 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 do not 
require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. 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.  
 
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 skilled nursing facility (SNF) services provided on March 
17, 2023 to March 31, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the skilled nursing facility services. You say that the services were medically 
necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the claim cannot be paid as 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. 
 
We find that the SNF services billed are not supported in the medical record. Specifically, the claim did not 
include a valid Patient Driven Payment Model (PDPM) code. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of the skilled nursing facility services have not been met. Therefore, we decided 
that the Plan does not have to pay for skilled nursing facility (SNF) services provided on March 17, 2023 to 
March 31, 2023.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for a crown (D2740) and a core build-up (D2950) provided on 
April 17, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the dental services. You say that these services should be covered. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says your annual dental allowance amount has already been exhausted. 
 
Medicare generally does not cover dental services. However, the Plan offers a dental benefit that exceeds 
Medicare coverage. For that reason, the Plans coverage rules apply in this case. 
 
Though the Plan offers a dental benefit in excess of Medicare coverage, certain limitations apply. The record 
shows your annual dental allowance amount was exhausted on date of service April 17, 2023. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pay the remaining amount for a crown (D2740) and a core build-up 
(D2950) provided on April 17, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided by a chiropractor (99203) provided 
on May 16, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the office visit. You say that without the office visit to go over your history and 
issues you would not have been able to be treated. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this 
chiropractic service is excluded from coverage. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that the only chiropractic service Medicare covers is 
manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation.  
 
The records show that the service at issue is not manual manipulation of the spine. Therefore, we decided that 
the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided by a chiropractor (99203) provided on May 16, 2023.
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 the medication. You say that you are appealing with supporting records. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says that 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 the medication. Our reviewer says that 
the criteria for coverage of Supartz have not been met. Our physician reviewer found that the Plan requires a 
trial of Synvisc, Synvisc-One or Euflexxa before they will approve the requested drug. In this case, the enrollee 
has not tried and failed the required drugs. There is no documentation provided indicating 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 the medication have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve Supartz.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve general anesthesia (D9222/D9223) and therapeutic 
parenteral drugs (D9612). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve D9222, D9223 and D9612. You say that you need this dental work. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says these services have been processed correctly. 
 
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. The Plan covers D9222, 
D9223 and D9612 when the services are medically necessary and reasonable.  
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that the Plan's rules for 
coverage of D9222, D9223 have not been met. D9612 is not a covered benefit. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve general anesthesia (D9222/D9223) and therapeutic parenteral drugs 
(D9612).
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 requesting reconsideration for the denial of 
an IRF admission based on medical necessity. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the request for 
admission to an IRF 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 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 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.  
 
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 pay for Tetanus, Diphtheria Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis vaccine 
provided on April 24, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for Tetanus, Diphtheria Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis vaccine. You say that you 
were asked to get the shot.  The Plan denied your request. The Plan says your health Plan doesn't cover Part D 
services. 
 
In the absence of injury or direct exposure to illness, Medicare does not pay for or provide Tetanus, Diphtheria 
Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis vaccine. The Plan follows the same rules.  
 
Records do not show that you have been injured or directly exposed to any illness related to Tetanus, 
Diphtheria Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis vaccine. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay 
for Tetanus, Diphtheria Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis vaccine provided on April 24, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve an office visit to be provided by an out-of-network 
(OON) provider.  
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve an office visit. You say that you had seen the provider for breast cancer in 
2015. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this provider is out-of-network and authorization was not 
obtained. 
 
Medicare rules say that plans can require enrollees to get care from network providers. The contract with the 
Plan says that the Plan has to pre-approve care from out-of-network providers only in cases involving 
emergencies, out of area urgent care and care that cannot be provided by network providers. 
 
The requested provider in this case is not a network provider with the Plan. The Plan has network providers available who can provide the items/services at issue in this appeal. We found no exception that would require 
the Plan to pre-approve these items/services. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve 
an office visit to be provided by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Home Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for home health services provided on April 12, 2023 to May 11, 
2023. 
 You asked the Plan to pay for the home health services. You say that this service was medically necessary. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says the NOA was not received timely. As such, this final claim was 
correctly denied.  
 
The Plan follows Medicare rules. The rules say that an NOA must be submitted within 5 days of the start of 
care date for home health services. NOAs which are received more than 30 days from the timely filing date 
result in no payment being made for the episode of care.  
 
In this case, the start of care date is April 12, 2023. The NOA was not received by the Plan. As more than 30 
days passed between the timely filing date and the NOA receipt, no payment can be made on this claim. 
Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for home health services provided on April 12, 2023 
to May 11, 2023.
Appeal type: SNF
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve SNF care. 
 You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF care. You say that   admission to a SNF is medically necessary.  The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says the documentation received does not support 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 you do not have daily skilled nursing needs that require the specialized skill, 
knowledge, and judgment of a skilled professional nurse. You do not have daily skilled therapy needs that 
require the specialized skill, knowledge, and judgment of a skilled professional therapist. You do not require 
daily skilled nursing and/or skilled therapy on an inpatient basis in a 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 SNF care.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for an office visit provided on August 02, 
2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for an office visit. You say that you think that this was an annual 
wellness visit. 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 $10 
copayment for each in-network Medicare covered primary care provider office visit. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $10 copayment for an office visit. This item/service falls within the each in-
network Medicare covered primary care provider office visit benefit category. 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 an office visit provided on August 02, 2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for an office visit provided on April 18, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for an office visit. You say that you disagree with the copayment. 
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 $30 
copayment for physician/practitioner services. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $30 copayment for an office visit. This item/service falls within the 
physician/practitioner services benefit category. 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 
an office visit provided on April 18, 2022.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for lab services provided on March 20, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for lab services. You say that the enrollee was in a nursing home at the time services 
were rendered. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that unauthorized, out-of-network care is not 
covered. 
 
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 provider of the item(s)/service(s) at issue in this appeal is not a network provider with the Plan. The Plan 
did not pre-approve the item(s)/service(s) at issue. We found no exception that would require the Plan to pay 
for the item(s)/service(s). Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for lab services provided on 
March 20, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit in a facility provided on March 14, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit in a facility. You say that this patient is in a facility, and you 
depend upon the facility staff for any verification or prior authorization. The Plan denied your request. The 
Plan says that unauthorized, out-of-network care is not covered. 
 
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 provider of the item(s)/service(s) at issue in this appeal is not a network provider with the Plan. The Plan 
did not pre-approve the item(s)/service(s) at issue. We found no exception that would require the Plan to pay 
for the item(s)/service(s). Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit in a 
facility provided on March 14, 2023.
Appeal type: Testing
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for an ultrasound provided on June 07, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for an ultrasound. You say that you say that you shouldnt be 
responsible for this. 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 $50 
copayment for outpatient diagnostic tests and therapeutic services and supplies. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $50 copayment for an ultrasound. This item/service falls within the outpatient 
diagnostic tests and therapeutic services and supplies benefit category. 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 an ultrasound provided on June 07, 2023.
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 requires intensive inpatient rehabilitation 
with daily physician management, continuous specialized rehabilitation nursing, and intensive therapies to 
optimize mobility and strengthening while ensuring the restoration of functional status for a safe and 
sustainable discharge. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says admission to an IRF 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 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. 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 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 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 inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Testing
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for an in-network 
esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) provided on May 15, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for an in-network esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). You say 
that you had a colonoscopy done in 2020 and you were not charged a copayment. You shouldnt have one. 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 $150 
copayment for Medicare-covered services provided in an ambulatory surgical center. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $150 copayment for an in-network esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). This item/service falls within the Medicare-covered services provided in an ambulatory surgical center benefit 
category. 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 an in-network esophagogastroduodenoscopy 
(EGD) provided on May 15, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for a comprehensive hearing test provided on 
May 30, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for a comprehensive hearing test. You say that you do not agree 
with the copayment. 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 $35 
copayment for in-network services received from a level 1 physician for Medicare-covered hearing services. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $35 copayment for a comprehensive hearing test. This item/service falls within 
the in-network services received from a level 1 physician for Medicare-covered hearing services benefit category. 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 a comprehensive hearing test provided on May 
30, 2023.