Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
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 enrollee has failed lower level of care 
and now requires daily physician visits and aggressive wound care and intravenous antibiotics. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the LTACH services are not medically necessary, and the enrollee's needs are 
being met at the current inpatient acute care. 
 
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 acute encephalopathy secondary to sepsis. The record 
indicates that the enrollee is improving but still requires acute care services before transitioning to a lower level of care. The enrollee continues to receive acute care services, and these have not been denied. The medical 
record does not indicate that the enrollee requires services that he is 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: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for physician services (99233) provided on January 7, 2023 to 
January 8, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the physician services. You say that this service was medically necessary. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says the claim was not billed with a valid primary diagnosis. 
 
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 CPT code 99223 is not supported in the medical record. Specifically, diagnosis code I21.A1 has a 
code first note and the underlying diagnosis was not billed. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of the physician services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pay for physician services (99233) provided on January 7, 2023 to January 8, 2023.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the laboratory services related to end-stage renal disease 
(ESRD) provided on February 6, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the ESRD-related laboratory services. You say that at this time, there is no 
contractual agreement which indicates these tests should be included in the dialysis rate. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says Medicare does not separately pay for ESRD-related laboratory testing. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules state that routine ESRD laboratory services are not 
separately payable. Laboratories should bill the facility directly for laboratory services as they are considered 
part of the composite rate. No other payment for these services is allowed. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pay for the laboratory services related to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) provided on 
February 6, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an anual wellnesws visit (G0438) provided on October 03, 
2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an anual wellnesws visit (G0438). You say that the service was medically 
necessary. 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 anual wellnesws visit 
(G0438) provided on October 03, 2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit and related services provided on March 06, 
2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit and related services. You say that the services should be covered. 
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 and 
related services provided on March 06, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure codes 99601 and 99602 billed for date of service 
December 8, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure codes 99601 and 99602. You say that the services were provided in 
good faith and should be paid accordingly. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the billed codes are 
invalid for Medicare purposes.   The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate procedure code. 
 
We find that procedure codes 99601 and 99602 have a Status Indicator of I on the Physician Fee Schedule. 
This means that procedure codes 99601 and 99602 are not valid for Medicare purposes. Based on this 
information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of procedure codes 99601 and 99602 have not been 
met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure codes 99601 and 99602 billed for 
date of service December 8, 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 you still require assistance with your medical needs.  
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says you do not meet the criteria for admission to an IRF.  
 
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. 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: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for mohs micrographic technique and repair provided on 
February 22, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for mohs micrographic technique and repair. You say that the services should be 
covered. 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 mohs micrographic 
technique and repair provided on February 22, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for a specialist office visit provided on 
February 08, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for a specialist 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 $20 
copayment for physician/practitioner services/specialist. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $20 copayment for a specialist office visit. This item/service falls within the 
physician/practitioner services/specialist 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 specialist office visit provided on February 08, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 99222 for date of service January 5, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 99222. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says the services are not payable as billed. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that certain diagnosis codes should be billed in 
certain orders. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Review of the file shows that code 99222 was billed with primary 
diagnosis I21.A1 (Myocardial infarction type 2). This diagnosis code has a "code first" note. This means this 
code is not acceptable as a primary diagnosis.  
 Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of procedure code 99222 have not been 
met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 99222 for date of service 
January 5, 2023.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a computed tomography (CT) scan of the chest. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the CT scan of the chest. You say that the services are medically necessary 
for the enrollee due to their ongoing nicotine dependence. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says results 
of a prior ultrasound must have failed to find the source of your problem.  
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that CT scans are covered only when they are 
medically 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 the CT scan of the chest. Our reviewer 
says that the CT scan is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the record indicates that the 
enrollee has supraclavicular adenopathy. The provided records do not indicate the medical necessity or 
reasonableness, as defined by Medicare rules, of the requested service. The elements of the coverage criteria 
are not satisfied. The requested service cannot be 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 CT scan of the chest have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve a computed tomography (CT) scan of the chest.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for end-stage renal disease (ESRD)-related services. provided on 
January 01, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for end-stage renal disease (ESRD)-related services.. You say that the services at 
issue were a medical necessity for the enrollee. 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 end-stage renal disease 
(ESRD)-related services. provided on January 01, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for a nursing facility visit provided on February 23, 2023, to 
February 24, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for a nursing facility visit. You say that you depend on the facility staff to verify 
eligibility and to obtain 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 a nursing facility visit 
provided on February 23, 2023, to February 24, 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 services are necessary for your medical care 
needs and for you to return to being independent. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says you do not meet 
the criteria for admission to an IRF.  
 
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. 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: 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 medical records support the need for IRF 
admission. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says based on Medicare guidelines and the information we 
have about the enrollee's condition they do not meet all of the requirements. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically 
reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section. 
 
 We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested IRF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found the complexity of the enrollees nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs do not 
require an acute rehabilitation hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. 
The enrollee does not require treatment by multiple therapies, including either physical or occupational therapy 
at an intensive rehabilitation therapy program. The enrollee continues to have a need for skilled therapy with 
ongoing safety concerns and a potential for functional improvement, however, the documentation does not 
support that they would meet criteria for admission to an acute IRF. 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: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided on October 25, 2022. 
 
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 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 provided 
on October 25, 2022.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the intracept procedure (64628 and 64629). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the service. You say that the surgery is medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee's records do not show that they meet the medical necessity 
criteria. The Plan states the enrollee has a prior spine fragility fractures/compression fracture and they have disc 
bulges, spinal stenosis, facet arthrosis, and nerve root impingement concerns.  
 
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 service. Our reviewer says that the 
requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our physician 
reviewer found there is no magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showing only modic changes without facet 
degenerative joint disease (DJD) or foraminal stenosis. The cause of back pain is not clear.  
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 service have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve the intracept procedure (64628 and 64629).
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure codes 87631, 94761 and 99072 billed for date of 
service October 17, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure codes 87631, 94761 and 99072. You say that these services are 
supported in the medical records. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the claim for this molecular 
pathology testing did not include the required unique identifier. In addition, codes 94761 and 99072 are not 
separately payable. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate procedure code. The rules also say that for molecular 
diagnostic tests, such as the test at issue, the MolDX program requires these tests to be reviewed to determine 
whether Medicare reasonable and necessary requirements are met. When such review is complete, the test is 
assigned a unique identifier and the coverage status is listed in the DEXTM Diagnostics Exchange. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Review of the claim does not show that the required unique identifier 
was reported. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of procedure code 87631 
have not been met. 
 
In addition, we find that procedure code 99072 has a status indicator of B on the Physician Fee Schedule. This 
means that procedure code 99072 is not separately payable. We have also confirmed that procedure code 94761 
has a status indicator of T on the Physician Fee Schedule and was billed with other payable services under the 
physician fee schedule for the same date by the same provider. This means that procedure code 94761 is not 
separately payable in this case. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of 
codes 99072 and 94761 have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for 
procedure codes 87631, 94761 and 99072 billed for date of service October 17, 2022.