Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the 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 does not meet the level of 
care at an LTACH, and their needs can be met at a skilled nursing facility or continued approval at the inpatient 
hospital. 
 
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 that the enrollee appears to be improving and requires only short-term additional 
acute care services that can safely be provided at the current facility until more stable and appropriate for 
transfer to a lower level of care. The enrollee does not require services at the LTACH that are not already 
available at the current facility. There are no services at the LTACH that the enrollee requires that are not 
already available and covered at the current facility. Transfer to the LTACH is not medically necessary as it 
would not be clinically advantageous. Completion of treatment at the current facility is recommended. 
 
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 the LTACH services.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the coinsurance for an automatic external defibrillator 
(K0606) received on November 12, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the coinsurance for an automatic external defibrillator. You say that you were not 
aware that you would have to pay anything. 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 20% 
coinsurance for durable medical equipment.  
 
   
You have been asked to pay a 20% coinsurance for an automatic external defibrillator. This item/service falls 
within the durable medical equipment 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 coinsurance for 
an automatic external defibrillator (K0606) received on November 12, 2022.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a pneumatic compression device (E0651, E0669). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the device. You say that this is medically necessary. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says the enrollee does not have active coverage with the plan. 
 
Please note that coverage with the plan termed on 4/30/23. The original request was on 4/26/23, so the appeal 
must be worked normally. 
 
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 device. Our reviewer says that the 
requested services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our physician reviewer 
found that the enrollee has lower extremity lymphedema with hyperkeratosis and hyperpigmentation. However, 
the documentation indicates that it is stable with the use of compression garments and medication. The enrollee 
is noted to have 1+ lower extremity edema and there are no measurements indicating the worsening of his 
lower extremity lymphedema. The documentation also indicates that the enrollee has not had lymphedema 
therapy and failed all conservative measures. Therefore, the requested pneumatic compression device and 
components (E0651, E0669) are not medically 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 device have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve a pneumatic compression device (E0651, E0669).
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 services are necessary for the enrollee to return 
home with a maximum level of functioning. 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 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 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: 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 feel that admission could help you be stronger 
and more independent. 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 you do not require treatment by multiple therapies, including either physical therapy 
or occupational therapy, and an intensive rehabilitation therapy program. While the medical record supports a 
need for physical 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: 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 was independent prior to hospitalization 
and motivated and eager to return home. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not 
meet the Medicare criteria for admission to an Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility. 
 
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: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve daily image guidance. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the requested services. You say that the treatment requires daily monitoring. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this type of radiation is not needed for the enrollee's skin cancer. 
 
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 requested services. Our physician 
reviewer found that when treating skin cancers, there is generally not a need for image guided radiation therapy 
(IGRT) unless deep structures are being treated. Daily simple simulations for a technology for which need has 
not been established by published data or supported by consensus guidelines is not necessary. The requested 
daily IGRT would not be furnished in accordance with accepted standards of medical practice. 
 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 requested services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve daily image guidance.
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 enrollee needs wound care which they cannot 
receive in a skilled nursing facility. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says an IRF admission is not 
medically necessary, and the enrollee's needs can be met at an alternate level of care. 
 
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 enrollee does not meet criteria for admission to an acute inpatient 
rehabilitation facility. The complexity of the enrollee's nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs do not require 
an acute rehab hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The enrollee can 
receive further services at a lower 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 IRF admission and services.
Appeal type: Testing
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 76770 billed for date of service December 
26, 2022. 
 You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 76770. You say that the member had multiple exams done on 
this date of service. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says payment for code 76770 is bundled into 
payment for code 93975. 
 
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, we have confirmed that code 76770 
is a column II code to column I code 93975. This claim has not been billed with an appropriate modifier to 
bypass the edit. Based on the claim submitted, Medicare billing criteria have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 76770 billed for date of service December 26, 
2022.
Appeal type: Home Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the home health skilled nursing services provided on August 
16, 2022 to September 6, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for home health skilled nursing services. You say that the medical records provided 
support the medical necessity. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services are not medically 
necessary. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that home health care services may be covered if it is 
medically necessary for the enrollee to receive skilled nursing or therapy. A doctor must certify the need for 
home health care services. 
 
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 home health skilled nursing services. Our 
reviewer says that the services are not medically reasonable and necessary. Our physician reviewer found the 
enrollee does not have documented skilled nursing needs (i.e., intravenous, complex wound care, new tube 
feedings, new ostomy).  As such, the requested, ongoing, home health skilled nursing services are not 
medically necessary or reasonable. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of home health skilled nursing services have not been met. Therefore, we decided 
that the Plan does not have to pay for the home health skilled nursing services provided on August 16, 2022 to 
September 6, 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 needs to be seen by a rehabilitation 
doctor 3 times a week, physical and occupational therapy and intensive team care. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says the enrollee's records do not show that you need an intensive team for your care, 
services needed may be provided safely in a lower level of care. 
 
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: 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 records provided support medical 
necessity. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the LTACH services requested do 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 was admitted with incarcerated parastomal hernia and underwent 
operative intervention.  The record indicates that the enrollee is improving but still requires acute care services 
before transitioning to a lower level of care. The medical record does not indicate that the enrollee requires 
services they are not currently receiving but that would be available at the LTACH 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 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: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve prosthetic leg to be provided by an out-of-network 
(OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve prosthetic leg. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the requested items can be provided by a network provider. 
 
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 
prosthetic leg to be provided by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Skyrizi (J2327). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Skyrizi. You say that the conventional therapies are no longer indicated for 
the enrollee's condition. You say that immunomodulator are not used in combination therapy and not on their 
own. You also say that the requested medication is medically necessary for the enrollee. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says the requested medication is not medically necessary. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare pays for a drug or biological only if it is safe 
and effective and otherwise reasonable and necessary.  
 
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 Skyrizi. Our reviewer says that the 
request for Skyrizi is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the provided documentation does 
not contain any objective data to meet the definition of Crohn's disease, nor to support disease activity. 
Therefore, the reviewer found that the requested for Skyrizi 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 Skyrizi have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to 
pre-approve Skyrizi (J2327).
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure codes 88341 and 88344 billed for date of service 
July 22, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure codes 88341 and 88344. You say that these services are supported in 
the medical record. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says payment for code 88344 is bundled into 
payment for code 88342. In addition, procedure code 88341 is an add-on code which was billed without an 
appropriate primary procedure. 
 
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, we have confirmed that code 88344 
is a column II code to column I code 88342. This claim has not been billed with an appropriate modifier to 
bypass the edit. In addition, we have confirmed that code 88341 is an add-on code and has not been billed with 
an approved, appropriate primary procedure code. Based on the claim submitted, Medicare billing criteria have 
not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure codes 88341 and 88344 
billed for date of service July 22, 2022.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a home ventilator (E0466). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a home ventilator. You say that without noninvasive ventilation (NIV) 
therapy the enrollee is at higher risk for more frequent hospital readmissions. The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says the requested ventilator is not medically necessary. 
 
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 the requested ventilator is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the record indicates that 
the enrollee has chronic respiratory failure from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The provided 
primary source documentation does not contain sufficient detailed information in the medical record to justify 
the treatment selected. Therefore, the reviewer found that the requested ventilator 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 a home ventilator have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does 
not have to pre-approve a home ventilator (E0466).