Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided on October 6, 2022, by an out-of-
network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit. You say that this was medically necessary and should be covered. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says there was no preauthorization by a primary care provider (this is 
different than a referral) for an out-of-network (OON) provider or facility. 
 
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 October 6, 2022, by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the stellate ganglion injection (64510). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the stellate ganglion injection. You say that the service is medically 
necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the 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 looked at the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for 
coverage of the stellate ganglion injection have not been met. Specifically, the enrollees' diagnosis is not a 
covered diagnosis for this service. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the stellate 
ganglion injection (64510).
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an intraoral - periapical first radiographic image (D0220), 
bitewing - single radiographic image (D0270), and amalgam - four or more surfaces, primary or permanent 
tooth #19 (D2161) provided on October 29, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the dental services. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the dental 
services were received from an out-of-network provider and are not covered by your supplemental benefits. A 
review showed there are over 100 participating dental offices within 10 miles of your home address. 
 
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 record shows you received the requested dental services from an out-of-network provider. Though the Plan 
offers a dental benefit in excess of Medicare coverage, the requested items or services are not covered under 
this benefit when received from an out-of-network provider. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pay for an intraoral - periapical first radiographic image (D0220), bitewing - single radiographic image 
(D0270), and amalgam - four or more surfaces, primary or permanent tooth #19 (D2161) provided on October 
29, 2022.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve occlusal mouth guard (D9944). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the dental services. You say that this should be covered. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says your benefit for the requested item or service 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 benefit for the requested item or service was exhausted on date of service April 4, 2021. Therefore, 
we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve occlusal mouth guard (D9944).
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pay for the lab testing services provided on January 5, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the lab services. You say that the testing was medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says that the services were not deemed medically necessary. 
 
Medicare rules say that a contract provider is an agent of the plan. Services and referrals given by a contract 
provider are considered approved by the plan unless notice is provided that the services will not be covered. 
The plan follows these rules. 
 
The enrollee was referred for the lab services by a contract provider. The file does not show that the plan 
provided notice that the lab services would not be covered. Under Medicare rules, this means the lab services is 
considered approved by the plan. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pay for the lab testing services 
provided on January 5, 2023.  
 
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 an IRF admission and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that you would like reconsideration based on the records 
submitted. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the requested 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 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. While the enrollee may have 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 an IRF admission and services.
Appeal type: SNF
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve SNF care. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF care. You say that you would like reconsideration based on the records 
submitted. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that the SNF services requested do not meet the 
requirements for approval. 
 
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 the clinical documentation shows that the enrollee has had clinical and functional 
status changes (right upper extremity (RUE) fracture, electrolyte derangement, pain management issues, deep 
vein thrombosis (DVT), and new medications. Thus, the enrollee would require assessment by skilled nursing 
and therapy. The enrollees past level of function was modified independent with household mobility and is 
now minimum to maximum assistance with mobility. Thus, the enrollee is below their previous functional 
level. With weight bearing restrictions in addition to paraplegia, the documentation shows functional 
complexity requiring daily skilled services. The clinical documentation shows that the enrollee requires daily 
skilled services on an inpatient basis in a skilled nursing facility. 
 
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 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: ER
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the emergency room (ER) services provided on December 
24, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the ER services. You say that the services were medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says this provider is not enrolled in Medicare. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare payment cannot be made to a provider that is 
not enrolled in the Medicare program. Medicare covers services in an emergency department only if the 
emergency clinic is affiliated with a hospital. 
 
Review of the file and Medicare records indicates that the provider at issue is not enrolled in the Medicare program. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the emergency room (ER) services 
provided on December 24, 2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for initial hospital care (procedure code 99223) rendered on June 
19, 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 Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 99223 (1 unit) remains 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 code 99223 is "Initial hospital care, per day, for the evaluation 
and management of a patient, which requires these 3 key components: A comprehensive history; A 
comprehensive examination; and Medical decision making of high complexity. Counseling and/or coordination 
of care with other physicians, other qualified health care professionals, or agencies are provided consistent with 
the nature of the problem(s) and the patient's and/or family's needs. Usually, the problem(s) requiring admission are of high severity. Typically, 70 minutes are spent at the bedside and on the patient's hospital floor 
or unit." 
 
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 the records do not include any notes 
from the date of service in question. The code cannot be verified. 
 
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 initial hospital care (procedure code 99223) rendered on June 19, 2022.
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 you are requesting an expedited reconsideration for 
the denial of an IRF admission. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says medical necessity for an acute IRF 
admission has 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 clinical documentation shows that you have complex functional impairments, 
but there are no active medical issues. Thus, the complexity of your nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs 
would not require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. You 
require physical and occupational therapy however, evaluating therapists recommend a less intense therapy 
such as in a skilled nursing facility. 
 
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: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve LTACH services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the LTACH services. You say that LTACH admission is medically 
necessary for the enrollee. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee is receiving appropriate in-
patient acute care and does not require transfer to a long-term acute care hospital (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 is receiving appropriate care at the present acute care hospital. The 
enrollee does not require services at the LTACH that are not available at the acute care hospital where the 
enrollee is currently receiving care. 
 
  We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of the LTACH services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve LTACH services.
Appeal type: Step-Therapy
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Xiextenzo. 
 You asked the Plan to pre-approve Xiextenzo. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee has not 
tried two of the preferred step therapy drugs. 
 
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 Xiextenzo. Our physician reviewer 
found that the enrollee has malignant neoplasm of the ovary. The Plan requires a trial of two of Neulasta, 
Fulphila, or Udenyca before they will approve the requested drug. The enrollee has not tried and failed the 
required drugs. The documentation does not support that the required drugs would likely be less effective, 
and/or would likely have adverse effects for the enrollee in this case. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Xiextenzo have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve Xiextenzo.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve an IRF admission and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that you had a stroke, and your right side is paralyzed. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the requested IRF services are 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 complexity of your nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not require 
an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. You do not require 
treatment by multiple therapies, including either physical therapy or occupational therapy, and an intensive 
rehabilitation therapy program. While you may have 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 an IRF admission and services.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an intraoral - periapical first radiographic image (D0220), 
each additional radiographic image (D0230), periodic oral evaluation - established patient (D0120), bitewings - 
four radiographic images (D0274), and prophylaxis - adult (D1110) provided on April 11, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the dental services. You say that you are aware of having in-network preventive 
services. You also say that you were told by the dental office that they were in-network and were glad to send 
in your claim and assured you your insurance would pay it. You realize now there was a miscommunication 
and would like you to reconsider the denial.  The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the dental services were received from an out-of-network 
provider and are not covered by your supplemental benefits. 
 
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 record shows you received the requested dental services from an out-of-network provider. Though the Plan 
offers a dental benefit in excess of Medicare coverage, the requested services are not covered under this benefit 
when received from an out-of-network provider. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for 
an intraoral - periapical first radiographic image (D0220), each additional radiographic image (D0230), 
periodic oral evaluation - established patient (D0120), bitewings - four radiographic images (D0274), and 
prophylaxis - adult (D1110) provided on April 11, 2022.
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 you are requesting reconsideration for the denial 
of an IRF admission based on medical necessity. 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, rehabilitation and medical needs do not 
require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitative care. While the 
enrollee may benefit from physical and occupational therapy, the enrollee's rehabilitation needs can be 
provided in a lower intensity and alternate setting such as in a skilled nursing facility or in-home with 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 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: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve complete denture - maxillary/mandibular (D5110, 
D5120). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the dental services. You say that this should be covered. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says your benefit for the requested item or service 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 benefit for the requested item or service was exhausted on date of service April 8, 2022. Therefore, 
we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve complete denture - maxillary/mandibular (D5110, 
D5120).