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 September 26, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit. You say that it is the responsibility of the facility 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 an office visit provided 
on September 26, 2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for wound care services provided on June 17, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for wound care services. You say that the records attached support the services 
provided. 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 wound care services 
provided on June 17, 2022.
Appeal type: Hospice
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the surgical services provided on February 13, 2023. 
 
 You asked the Plan to pay for the surgical services. You say that the enrollee's hospice ended before the 
services were provided. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says Original Medicare is responsible for 
payment. 
 
Medicare rules say that Original Medicare, not the Plan, is responsible for all Medicare-covered non-hospice 
services. Original Medicare is responsible for payment for services until the first day of the month after the 
hospice election has been revoked or terminated. 
 
The enrollee ended Medicare Hospice benefits on February 12, 2023. The services in question were provided 
before the end of that month. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the surgical services 
provided on February 13, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided on October 15, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit. You say that these services should have been authorized. 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 15, 2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 99232 provided on October 19, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 99232. You say that you would like the Plan to reconsider their 
denial of payment. 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 procedure code 99232 is included in the global surgery 
payment for procedure code 10160 provided on October 14, 2022. Separate payment cannot be made for 
procedure code 99232. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of procedure 
code 99232 have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 
99232 provided on October 19, 2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided on February 01, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit. 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 provided 
on February 01, 2023.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided on November 11, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit. You say that the records attached support the services provided. 
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 November 11, 2022.
Appeal type: Outpatient Mental Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an outpatient mental health visit provided on November 22, 
2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an outpatient mental health visit. You say that the records attached support the 
services provided. 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 outpatient mental 
health visit provided on November 22, 2022.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for the magnetic resonance imaging provided 
on August 11, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for the magnetic resonance imaging. You say that the service was 
requested to assess your knee pain. 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 $110 
copayment for in-network outpatient diagnostic tests and therapeutic services and supplies. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $110 copayment for the magnetic resonance imaging. This item/service falls within the in-network outpatient diagnostic tests and therapeutic services and supplies benefit category. This 
means that you have been asked to pay the correct amount based on your contract with the Plan. This cost 
sharing is a contractual obligation you agreed to pay when you enrolled in the Plan. Therefore, we decided that 
the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for the magnetic resonance imaging provided on August 11, 
2022.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for laboratory services provided on September 12, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for laboratory services. You say that the records attached support the services 
provided. 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 laboratory services 
provided on September 12, 2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for an office visit provided on November 06, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for an office visit. You say that there is no prior authorization required for the 
services provided. 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 November 06, 2022.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to waive the copayment for the laparoscopy procedure provided on 
January 20, 2023. 
 
You asked the Plan to waive the copayment for the laparoscopy procedure. You say that you were under that 
assumption that it was $350 a night for staying overnight at the hospital. 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 $350 
copayment for outpatient surgery, including services provided at hospital outpatient facilities. 
 
You have been asked to pay a $350 copayment for the laparoscopy procedure. This item/service falls within the outpatient surgery, including services provided at hospital outpatient facilities 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 the laparoscopy procedure provided on January 20, 2023.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve kyphoplasty. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve kyphoplasty. 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 follows Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that PVA (percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) or 
kyphoplasty (PKP)) is covered in patients who meet certain criteria. 
 
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 kyphoplasty. Our reviewer says that the 
services are not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found additional diagnostic testing could not rule 
out potential other causes of pain. The x-rays from March 17, 2023, noted narrowing in the L2-S1 discs worst 
at L3-5 are seen and facet joint arthropathy at L4-S1. Additionally, he is not clearly documented to have trialed 
and failed any conservative modalities outside of medication. Moreover (as of April 6, 2023) he was noted to 
have declined the requested kyphoplasty with no updated documentation to corroborate he wishes to move 
forward with this requested procedure. No compelling rationale is presented, or extenuating circumstances 
noted to support the medical necessity of this request as an exception. Therefore, the enrollee does not meet the 
coverage criteria detailed in the LCD. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of kyphoplasty have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve kyphoplasty.
Appeal type: Outpatient Therapies
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for physical therapy (PT) services provided on October 6, 2021, 
through October 20, 2021, by an out-of-network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the PT services. You say that the services were necessary. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says there were network providers available at the time of service. 
 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 physical therapy (PT) services provided on 
October 6, 2021, through October 20, 2021, 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 continuous glucose monitor (CGM), supplies and 
accessories. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the CGM, supplies and accessories. You say that the medical records 
support the need for the CGM, supplies and accessories. The Plan denied your request.  
 The Plan follows Medicare rules. The rules say that therapeutic CGMs may be considered reasonable and 
necessary for enrollees with diabetes who meet the criteria referenced 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 the CGM, supplies and accessories. Our 
reviewer says that the service is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found since this is from 
February, and we are not told how the doses are adjusted or if they are adjusted, and if and when the patient 
was seen prior to the request for the CGM. Therefore, that criteria for CGM coverage are not met at this time. 
If an office visit took place, the note should be submitted and the case can be re-reviewed at that time. 
 
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 CGM, supplies and accessories. have not been met. Therefore, we decided 
that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a continuous glucose monitor (CGM), supplies and accessories.
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 medically necessary for the enrollee. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee's needs could be met at 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 enrollee is medically stable. While the enrollee may benefit from physical and 
occupational therapy, their rehab needs can be provided in a lower intensity and alternate setting such 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 inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Transportation
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the ambulance services provided on December 2, 2022. 
 You asked the Plan to pay for ambulance services. You say that the transportation services were provided prior 
to the enrollee receiving hospice care. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says Original Medicare is 
responsible for payment. 
 
Medicare rules say that Original Medicare, not the Plan, is responsible for all Medicare-covered non-hospice 
services. Medicare hospice pays for claims related to the terminal illness. The rules say that the Plan may direct 
the provider to bill Medicare directly for these services.  
 
The enrollee was under the Medicare hospice benefit for the dates of service at issue in this appeal. Therefore, 
we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the ambulance services provided on December 2, 2022.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a PET scan. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the PET scan. You say that the diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease and FTD 
differ in prognosis and treatment. You say that the PET scan can provide the enrollee with an accurate 
diagnosis. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says a PET scan is not medically necessary. 
 
The Plan follows Medicare rules. Medicare rules state that a PET scan for dementia and neurodegenerative 
diseases are only covered under certain conditions. 
 
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 PET scan. Our reviewer says that 
the service is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found that the records did not support that the 
enrollee met diagnostic criteria for either AD or FTD. The enrollee was noted to have a cognitive impairment, 
however there is no specific diagnoses given. In such setting or context, the base requirement of the NCD for 
coverage of the PET scan would not have been met or satisfied. Therefore, this would not meet the criteria for 
coverage.  
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 PET scan have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve a PET scan.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for a home or residence visit provided on December 13, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for a home or residence visit. You say that the records attached support the services 
provided. 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 home or residence visit 
provided on December 13, 2022.
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 requires prolonged and 
intensive skilled services that are not available at a lower level of care. The Plan denied your request. The Plan 
says when the enrollee is ready to leave the hospital, they can safely receive their care in another setting, such 
an inpatient rehabilitation facility or a skilled nursing facility. 
 
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.