Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
Appeal type: Home Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for home health services provided from June 30, 2022, to July 
23, 2022. 
 You asked the Plan to pay for the home health services. You say that home health is a covered benefit. 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 1, 2022. The NOA was not received by the Plan until September 24, 
2022. 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 
from June 30, 2022, to July 23, 2022.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the pneumatic compression device (E0676) provided on 
October 11, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the pneumatic compression device. You say that the item was medically 
necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this is not a covered item. 
 
The Plan follows Medicare rules. The rules state that a PCD that provides intermittent limb compression for the 
purpose of prevention of venous thromboembolism (E0676) is a preventive service. The rules also say that a 
PCD coded as E0675 to treat peripheral arterial disease is not eligible for reimbursement. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the PCD have not been met. Specifically, this item is not a covered benefit of Medicare or the Plan. 
PCDs are not covered for preventions of venous thromboembolism nor for treatment of peripheral artery 
disease, regardless of how they are billed on the claim. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to 
pay for the pneumatic compression device (E0676) provided on October 11, 2022.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pay for drug testing (G0482) billed for date of service December 19, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for drug testing. You say that you correctly billed the services at issue. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says that rules for payment have not been met. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate CPT code. 
 
In this case, the CPT Code Manual definition of code G0482 is: Drug test(s), definitive, utilizing (1) drug 
identification methods able to identify individual drugs and distinguish between structural isomers (but not 
necessarily stereoisomers), including, but not limited to gc/ms (any type, single or tandem) and lc/ms (any type, 
single or tandem and excluding immunoassays (e.g., ia, eia, elisa, emit, fpia) and enzymatic methods (e.g., 
alcohol dehydrogenase)), (2) stable isotope or other universally recognized internal standards in all samples 
(e.g., to control for matrix effects, interferences and variations in signal strength), and (3) method or drug-
specific calibration and matrix-matched quality control material (e.g., to control for instrument variations and 
mass spectral drift); qualitative or quantitative, all sources, includes specimen validity testing, per day; 15-21 
drug class(es), including metabolite(s) if performed. 
 
We find that CPT code G0482 is supported in the medical record. Specifically, the Plan's denial states that the 
documentation only supports that fewer than 15 drug classes were tested on the date of service at issue. We 
found that the records support the testing of 15 to 21 drug classes. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of drug testing have been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pay for 
drug testing (G0482) billed for date of service December 19, 2022.  
 
If the Plan does not agree with our decision, they can ask us to open a case again. We only open a case again 
if we believe there was a mistake or if there is new information to review. The Plan has to show us the mistake 
and/or send us the new information. This does not happen often. If we decide to open the case again, we will 
send you a letter.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the definitive drug testing of 22 or more classes (G0483).  
 You asked the Plan to pay for the definitive drug testing of 22 or more classes. You say that this testing was 
medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says under Medicare rules, the number of 
definitive urine drug classes requested 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 pay for the definitive drug testing of 22 or more 
classes. Our reviewer says that the requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and 
necessary in this case. Our physician reviewer found that the review has determined that the criteria for 
coverage listed in the LCD was not met for the definitive drug testing of 22 or more classes. The definitive 
testing of 22 or more drug classes was 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 the definitive drug testing of 22 or more classes have not been met. Therefore, 
we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the definitive drug testing of 22 or more classes (G0483).
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 for 
the enrollee's wound care and complex medical needs. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says there is no 
advantage in moving the enrollee from the current acute care hospital to an 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 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: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the acute inpatient hospital care provided from December 31, 
2022, through January 4, 2023. 
 
  
 
You asked the Plan to pay for these services. You say that you are requesting a reconsideration of the Plan's 
denial for payment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the acute inpatient hospital care provided was 
not medically necessary.  
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that inpatient hospital care is covered when the doctor 
expects the patient to need hospital care that crosses at least two midnights. In rare and unusual cases, 
consideration may be given to inpatient hospital care when the hospital stay does not cross two midnights or 
more.  
 
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 pay for these services. Our reviewer says that the 
documentation does not support that the criteria for inpatient payment are met in this case. Our physician 
reviewer found that the enrollee presented to the emergency department (ED) from the nursing facility with 
cough and fatigue. He was found to be dehydrated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) 
exacerbation as with previous episodes and was started on fluids, bronchodilators, and steroids. The chest x-ray 
showed patchy opacity with leukocytosis. He was diagnosed with possible pneumonia and started on 
antibiotics. His oxygen saturation level was 96% on room air and his vital signs were otherwise stable. The 
enrollee was alert and oriented and tolerated oral intake based on the provided documentation. Fluids, steroids, 
and antibiotics could have been administered at an observation level of care. The enrollee had not failed 
outpatient antibiotics. The enrollee was stable and it was not expected that he would require hospital services 
that would likely cross two midnights.  
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. 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 acute inpatient hospital care provided from December 31, 2022, through January 4, 2023.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pay for colonoscopy services (procedure code 45381 and 45385) rendered on 
November 10, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the services. You say that this should be paid for. The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says that the records do not support the services billed. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate CPT code. In this case, the CPT Code Manual definition of 
the denied codes is: 
 
CPT 45381: 
 
Colonoscopy, flexible; with directed submucosal injection(s), any substance 
 
CPT 45385: 
 
Colonoscopy, flexible; with removal of tumor(s), polyp(s), or other lesion(s) by snare technique 
 
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 supported by the medical records. Our reviewer found that the codes in question are supported 
by the medical record. The procedure report states that a 10mm flat polyp was removed from the cecum with a 
submucosal saline injection (45351) and cold snare technique (45385). According to coding guidelines, this 
procedure was reported correctly. 
 
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 been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pay for 
colonoscopy services (procedure code 45381 and 45385) rendered on November 10, 2022.  
 
If the Plan does not agree with our decision, they can ask us to open a case again. We only open a case again 
if we believe there was a mistake or if there is new information to review. The Plan has to show us the mistake 
and/or send us the new information. This does not happen often. If we decide to open the case again, we will 
send you a letter.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for cataract surgery provided on July 2, 2022, by an out-of-
network (OON) provider.  
 
You asked the Plan to pay for cataract surgery. You say that you were advised to have this surgery right away. 
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 cataract surgery provided on July 2, 2022, by an 
out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the drugs (J3490) provided on January 30, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the drugs. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says payment is included in 
the global surgery payment. 
 The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that the Medicare approved amount for global 
surgery procedures includes payment for services related to the surgery when furnished by the physician who 
performs the surgery. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Payment for the requested services (J3490) is included in the global 
surgery payment for the procedure (27096) provided on the same date of service. Based on this information, we 
decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the drugs have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pay for the drugs (J3490) provided on January 30, 2023.
Appeal type: Home Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for home health services provided from October 17, 2022, to 
November 15, 2022. 
 You asked the Plan to pay for the home health services. You say that you have submitted the required NOA. 
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 June 19, 2022. The NOA was not received by the Plan until December 2, 
2022. 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 
from October 17, 2022, to November 15, 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 the enrollee requires an IRF setting to make the 
necessary progress. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the denial of IRF care is correct. 
 
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. While the 
enrollee may need physical and/or occupational therapy, there is no documented need for intensive 
rehabilitation services. 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: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a ventilator (E0466). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a ventilator. 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. 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 ventilator. Our reviewer says that the 
services are not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found a home ventilator is not medically necessary. There is no arterial blood gas (ABG) done while stable showing chronic carbon dioxide (CO2) 
retention. If that were present, you may benefit from bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) with average 
volume-assured pressure support (AVAPS) during sleep. Medicare does not cover a home ventilator when used 
at settings that can be provided with BiPAP. 
 
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 ventilator have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve a ventilator (E0466).
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a MyoPro powered upper extremity range of motion 
assist device.  
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the MyoPro device. You say that it is felt that this device can help improve 
the enrollee's level of function.  The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this remains an experimental 
device at this time.  
 
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 MyoPro device. Our reviewer says 
that the requested device is not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our physician 
reviewer found the MyoPro Orthosis is not known to be effective, based on scientific evidence, professional 
standards, and expert opinion, in improving health outcomes.  The MyoPro is not the standard of care for this enrollee's spinal cord injury condition or in widespread use for 
this enrollee's upper extremity weakness from a spinal cord injury based on scientific evidence. There is 
insufficient evidence in the literature that the MyoPro Orthosis will improve the long-term outcomes for this 
enrollee. There is also insufficient evidence in the literature that this device will increase participation in 
bimanual activities. 
 
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 MyoPro device have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does 
not have to pre-approve a MyoPro powered upper extremity range of motion assist device.
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 a fast appeal with updated 
clinicals. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says 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 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 pay for an office visit provided on January 3, 2023, by an out-of-
network (OON) provider.  
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit. You say that this was medically necessary. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says this was not authorized. 
 
Medicare rules say that plans can require enrollees to get care from network providers. The contract with the 
Plan says that the Plan has to pay for care from out-of-network providers only in cases involving emergencies, 
out of area urgent care and pre-approved care. 
 
The requested provider in this case is not a network provider with the Plan. The Plan had network providers 
available who could have provided the items/services at issue in this appeal. The Plan did not pre-approve the item/service at issue. We found no exception that would require the Plan to pay for these items/services. 
Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided on January 3, 2023, 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 knee scooter (E0118). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a knee scooter. You say that this scooter will help with healing and take 
pressure off your foot. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this item is not covered under Medicare. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that for equipment to be covered, it must primarily serve a 
medical purpose.   
 
The item at issue in this appeal does not serve a purpose that is primarily medical in nature. This item is 
available to the general public and would be helpful even to those who are not sick or injured. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a knee scooter (E0118).