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

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that you would like to request reconsideration of the 
denied claim and that the services requested are medically necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan 
says the inpatient rehabilitation facility (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 found to be medically reasonable and necessary for this enrollee. Our physician reviewer 
found the Plan erred in its denial of IRF admission. Per Medicare Benefit Policy Manual, the medical record 
overall significantly complies with the various documentation requirements for IRF admission (e.g., as best 
summarized by the therapy and hospitalist notes from November 1, 2023).  This enrollees condition is in fact 
complex and fragile, and there is every reason to expect that they will participate in and benefit from IRF level 
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 been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pre-approve 
acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.  
 
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 acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission 
and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that the enrollee urgently needs therapy and wound care 
to avoid additional medical issues. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the inpatient rehabilitation 
facility 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 the enrollee's medical problems are stable and there are no complex nursing or 
rehabilitation needs. The enrollee does not require treatment by multiple therapies and an intensive 
rehabilitation therapy program. 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: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Skyrizi. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Skyrizi. You say that this is medically necessary. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says  the requested use of this drug is not supported. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare may pay for unlabeled uses for FDA-
approved drugs if they are medically accepted as safe and effective or appropriate for the particular use.  
 
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 
requested use of Skyrizi is not supported. Our physician reviewer found the record indicates that the enrollee 
has diagnoses of osteoarthritis, Chronic inflammatory arthritis, Seronegative rheumatoid arthritis, and 
Ulcerative colitis. The Food and Drug Administration has not stated that the requested drug is indicated for the 
enrollee's conditions.  The Medicare approved drug compendia do not contain a supportive citation for the use 
of the requested drug in the enrollee's clinical situation.  
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.
Appeal type: Testing
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 76642 billed for date of service December 
19, 2022.  
 You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 76642. You say that you have provided medical records to 
support payment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the number of units billed exceeds the maximum 
allowed.  
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that claims submitted where the unit of service 
exceeds the MUE value for the HCPCS/CPT code will be denied. 
 
In this case, the MUE for CPT code 76642 is 1. The MAI value for this code is 2. You billed 2 units of this 
code, exceeding the MUE. Specifically, you billed one line item of this code with the LT modifier and one line 
item of this code with the RT modifier instead of billing one line item with the bilateral modifier as is required. 
Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of procedure code 76642 have not been 
met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 76642 billed for date of 
service December 19, 2022.
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 the enrollee has complex issues that 
cannot be managed a lower level of care. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the LTACH services are 
not medically necessary. 
 
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 documentation does not support that the enrollee in this case requires services at 
the LTACH that are not available at the acute care hospital where they are currently receiving care. The 
requested LTACH services are not medically necessary, reasonable, and appropriate at this 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 LTACH services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve LTACH services.
Appeal type: Home Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve 3 home health skilled nursing visits (G0299) and 1 
home health physical therapy visit (G0151). 
 You asked the Plan to pre-approve home health services. You say that the services are necessary. 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 pre-approve home health 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. The enrollee does not have documented skilled therapy 
needs. The enrollee appears to have reached a plateau in function. Intermittent skilled services are not required 
to establish a maintenance program or to prevent deterioration of the enrollees condition. As such, the 
requested, ongoing, home health skilled nursing and home health physical therapy 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 services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve 3 home health skilled nursing visits (G0299) and 1 home health physical therapy 
visit (G0151).
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 you are requesting reconsideration of the 
denied LTACH admission. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says LTACH care is not reasonable and 
necessary. 
 
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 medical records indicate the enrollee has ongoing acute medical issues and 
still requires acute care services. The enrollee continues to receive acute care services, and these have not been 
denied. The medical records do not indicate that the enrollee requires services that would be available at the LTACH facility. The elements of the coverage rules 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 LTACH services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve LTACH 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 the enrollee meets LTACH admission 
criteria, and their ongoing medical care warrants an LTACH level of care to achieve a safe and sustainable 
discharge. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says admission to an LTACH is not medically necessary. 
 
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 is receiving acute hospital care, and acute care services have not 
been denied. There are no required medical services identified that are available at the LTACH, that are not 
available at the current health care setting being offered by the Plan. It is not clear that an additional 25 days of hospitalization are reasonably expected for the enrollee in this case. Consequently, the requested LTACH 
services are not medically necessary, reasonable, and appropriate for the diagnosis and condition of the enrollee 
at this 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 LTACH services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve LTACH services.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve stereotactic radiosurgery (61796) to be provided by an 
out-of-network (OON) provider/facility. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve stereotactic radiosurgery. You say that you disagree with the denial and 
request reconsideration. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee must use network providers 
and facilities to get his medical care and services. 
 
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 
stereotactic radiosurgery (61796) to be provided by an out-of-network (OON) provider/facility.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve radiation therapy for plantar fasciitis. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve radiation therapy. You say that the enrollee's plantar fasciitis is not 
amenable to other treatment options. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says it is not clear which findings 
support the diagnosis of plantar fasciitis and this treatment is still considered investigational. 
 
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 radiation therapy. Our reviewer says 
that the requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our 
physician reviewer found radiation for treatment-resistant plantar fasciitis, based upon published literature and 
guideline statements would be considered to be furnished with accordance of accepted standards of care. 
However, another basis for denial in this case was questioning the diagnosis of plantar fasciitis with no other records corroborating the diagnosis or that other treatments were ineffective. As this issue was not addressed in 
the appeal letter and no additional records were provided to support the diagnosis, this request is not supported 
as radiation treatment would only be an accepted standard if the diagnosis were well-established. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of radiation therapy have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does 
not have to pre-approve radiation therapy for plantar fasciitis.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve LTACH services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the LTACH services. You say that the enrollee is suffering due to sepsis and 
requires a LTACH admission. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that the request is not medically 
necessary. 
 
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 considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our physician 
reviewer found that the enrollee continues to be suffering from hypoxic respiratory failure due to multiple 
factors which will likely take several weeks to stabilize, as evidenced by his desaturation when standing. 
Although he is stable for transfer, he appears to require an inpatient level of care that can be provided at a 
LTACH since the duration of this level of care would likely meet or exceed and additional 25 days. 
 
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 been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to 
pre-approve LTACH services.  
 
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: Home Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve home health skilled nursing (G0299 x2). 
 You asked the Plan to pre-approve home health services. You say that this is medically necessary. 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 pre-approve home health services. Our reviewer 
says that the services are not medically reasonable and necessary. Our physician reviewer found documentation 
does not specify any acute clinical concern, change of plan of care or in medication regimen. The records do 
not show that 2 additional home health skilled nursing visits are required to effectively provide treatment, care, 
and/or services in order to improve your condition, or to establish/perform a maintenance program to maintain 
your condition and/or prevent deterioration. 
 
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 services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve home health skilled nursing (G0299 x2).
Appeal type: Home Health
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve continued home health aide services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the aide services. You say that the services you were receiving were helpful. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that the services are not medically necessary.  
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that HHA services may be covered if it is medically 
necessary for the enrollee to receive skilled nursing or therapy.  
 
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 aide services. Our reviewer says 
that the services are medically reasonable and necessary. Our physician reviewer found you are requiring 
skilled service as part of a plan of care including assistance with vital checks, intake/output recording, and 
foley care in addition to assistance with activities of daily living after an acute condition. Thus, clinical 
documentation does show home health aide services are reasonable and necessary to the treatment of your 
acute illness by skilled professional staff. 
 
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 aide services have been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pre-
approve continued home health aide services.  
 
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: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure codes 95908 and 95940 rendered on May 8, 2023. 
 
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 the denied codes remain 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 the denied codes is: 
 
CPT 95908: 
 
Nerve conduction studies; 3-4 studies 
 
CPT 95940: 
 
Continuous intraoperative neurophysiology monitoring in the operating room, one on one monitoring requiring 
personal attendance, each 15 minutes (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) 
 
In this case, we have confirmed that code 95908 is a column two code to column one code 95861 with a 
modifier indicator of 0. The column two code is therefore not payable. 
 
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 that the provided records document an 
L4-5 laminectomy was performed with intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring on 05/08/2023. The records 
do not clarify that 95940 was separate and distinct from G0453 on 05/08/2023. Provided records also report 
"real-time remote" monitoring was provided which is not consistent with CPT 95940 "continuous 
intraoperative neurophysiology monitoring in the operating room, one on one monitoring requiring personal 
attendance." 
 
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 procedure codes 95908 and 95940 rendered on May 8, 2023.