Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
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 it is medically necessary. 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 enrollees nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not 
require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The enrollee 
was admitted for non-surgical management of a hip fracture after a fall. Medical problems are stable. There are 
no complex nursing or rehabilitation needs.  
 
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. 
 
There is not a reasonable expectation that this enrollee will be able to fully participate in and benefit from the 
intensive rehabilitation therapy program provided in an IRF. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: SNF
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the continuation of skilled nursing facility (SNF) care 
from April 27, 2023. 
 You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF care. You say that the stay is medically necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the stay is not medically necessary based on SNF criteria. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare pays for care in a SNF when the four factors 
listed in the Medicare rules section are met. Custodial care is not covered. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve SNF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested SNF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found you did not require skilled therapy to establish a safe and effective maintenance 
program. As a practical matter, you did not require any skilled services on an inpatient basis, at a skilled level 
of care as of April 27, 2023. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of SNF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve the continuation of skilled nursing facility (SNF) care from April 27, 2023.
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 it is medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee does not meet all 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 does not require services at the LTACH that are not available at the acute 
care hospital where enrollee is currently receiving care. All medically necessary care is being provided in the 
current acute care setting.  
 There are no services available at the LTACH that the enrollee requires that are not available at the health care 
setting being offered by the health plan. The health plan has approved ongoing care in the current acute care 
setting.  
 
The requested LTACH services are not medically necessary, reasonable, and appropriate for the diagnosis and 
condition of the enrollee and able to be furnished safely and effectively only on an inpatient basis. 
 
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: Imaging
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve a bone imaging of the whole body (78306). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a bone imaging of the whole body. You say that the bone scan and x-ray are 
to check to see if any cancer had spread to other parts of your body. The Plan denied your request. The Plan 
says that this request does not meet the Medicare or health plan coverage criteria. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that if there are no specific coverage rules for an item 
or service, then that item or service will be covered when it is 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 a bone imaging of the whole body. Our 
reviewer says that the requested items/services are considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. 
Our physician reviewer found the presence of a 7-centimeter solid left renal mass is highly suspicious for 
malignancy and therapeutic options may depend on whether metastatic disease is present. Our reviewer found 
that renal cell cancer often metastasizes to bone. Thus, the requested bone scan should be approved. 
 
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 bone imaging of the whole body have been met. Therefore, we decided that 
the Plan has to pre-approve a bone imaging of the whole body (78306).  
 
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 it is medically necessary. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says the enrollee is receiving appropriate in-patient acute care and does not require transfer to 
a Long-Term Acute Care Hospital. 
 
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 services at the LTACH that are not available at the acute 
care hospital where the enrollee is currently receiving care. All medically necessary care is being provided in 
the current acute care setting.  
 
There are no services available at the LTACH that the enrollee requires that are not available at the health care 
setting being offered by the health plan. The health plan has approved ongoing care in the current acute care 
setting.  
 
The requested LTACH services are not medically necessary, reasonable, and appropriate for the diagnosis and 
condition of the enrollee and able to be furnished safely and effectively only on an inpatient basis. 
 
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 pre-approve gurney van transportation. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve gurney van transportation. You say that you can no longer take the enrollee 
out of the wheelchair, and you would prefer to continue having the gurney transportation services take them to 
and from their appointments. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says there is no medical need for non-
emergency medical transportation by ambulance. The Plan also says the enrollee can travel safely by other 
means of transportation. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare does not pay for gurney van transport 
services.  
 
 
 
 The services you have asked the Plan to pre-approve are gurney van transport services. Therefore, we decided 
that the Plan does not have to pre-approve gurney van transportation.
Appeal type: Step-Therapy
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Synvisc (J7325). 
 You asked the Plan to pre-approve Synvisc. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee has tried 
physical therapy per new information but has not met step therapy requirements. 
 
Medicare covers Part B medications when they are reasonable and necessary but allows health plans to 
implement step therapy criteria. The Plan's contract indicates that it has implemented such criteria for certain 
Part B medications. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve Synvisc. Our reviewer says that the 
enrollee does not meet the coverage criteria for Synvisc. Our physician reviewer found the Plan requires a trial 
of Euflexxa before they will approve the requested drug. In this case, the enrollee has not tried and failed the 
required drug. Our reviewer also found that there is no documentation provided indicating that the Plans 
required drug would likely be less effective and/or likely have adverse effects for the enrollee. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Synvisc have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve Synvisc (J7325).
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the eye exam (92014) provided on May 24, 2022, by an out-
of-network (OON) provider. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the eye exam. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says there is no referring 
provider. The Plan also says the services provided were not urgent or emergent and the rendering provider is 
non-participating. 
 
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 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 the eye exam (92014) provided on May 24, 2022, 
by an out-of-network (OON) provider.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the massage therapy services provided from December 14, 
2022, to December 28, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the massage therapy services. You say that you feel that the service should be 
covered. You also say that you were advised by a representative that this would be a covered service. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says massage therapy is not a covered benefit by Medicare. 
 
  The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare does not cover the services of a massage therapist. Therefore, 
we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the massage therapy services provided from December 14, 
2022, to December 28, 2022.
Appeal type: Supplemental Benefit
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve special supplemental benefits for the chronically ill 
(SSBCI). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve SSBCI benefits. You say that you cannot work, are fully disabled, and you 
need to keep your internet on so that your family can access your camera so they can provide help when you 
need it. You also say that you need the internet for the entire day of your life. The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says the criteria for eligibility have not been met. 
 The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that, to qualify for SSBCI, an enrollee must have a 
documented chronic condition that is life threatening or significantly limits the health or function of the 
enrollee, has a high risk of hospitalization or adverse health outcomes, and requires intensive care coordination.  
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for 
coverage of SSBCI benefits have not been met. Specifically, we have confirmed that you do not have an 
eligible condition that meets all the required criteria. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-
approve special supplemental benefits for the chronically ill (SSBCI).
Appeal type: SNF
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the continuation of skilled nursing facility (SNF) care 
from April 27, 2023, forward. 
 You asked the Plan to pre-approve SNF care. You say that the stay is medically necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the stay is not medically necessary based on SNF criteria. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare pays for care in a SNF when the four factors 
listed in the Medicare rules section are met. Custodial care is not covered. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve SNF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested SNF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found there were no skilled nursing needs. As of last covered day, the enrollee did not 
require any skilled nursing or rehabilitation services on a daily basis. The enrollee was not expected to make 
measurable gains within a reasonable and predictable period of time or require skilled therapy to prevent 
deterioration with mobility or self-care tasks. The enrollee did not require skilled therapy to establish a safe and 
effective maintenance program. As a practical matter, the enrollee did not require any skilled services on an 
inpatient basis, at a skilled level of care as of April 26, 2023. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of SNF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve the continuation of skilled nursing facility (SNF) care from April 27, 2023, forward.
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 it is medically necessary. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee continued stay at acute hospital until the enrollee is stable 
enough for discharge to lower level of care has not been denied. 
 
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 the enrollee is currently receiving care. All medically necessary care is being provided in 
the current acute care setting.  There are no services available at the LTACH that the enrollee requires that are not available at the health care 
setting being offered by the health plan. The health plan has approved ongoing care in the current acute care 
setting.  
 
The requested LTACH services are not medically necessary, reasonable, and appropriate for the diagnosis and 
condition of the enrollee and able to be furnished safely and effectively only on an inpatient basis. 
 
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: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the low dose computed tomography (CT) provided on June 
20, 2022. 
 
  You asked the Plan to pay for the low dose computed tomography. You say that this claim has not been paid in 
full or under the terms of the contract for the services provided to this enrollee. The Plan denied your request. 
The Plan says with the information provided, it cannot be determined how the enrollee came to the servicing 
provider or whether the services are medically necessary. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that the provider, supplier, or beneficiary, as 
appropriate, must furnish to the intermediary or carrier sufficient information to determine whether payment is 
due and the amount of payment. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that there is insufficient 
information in the record to determine if Medicare rules for coverage of the low dose computed tomography 
have been met. Medical records were not provided for this case. The record shows that the Plan made multiple 
attempts to obtain this information, but it was not received. Without medical records we are unable to 
determine if you meet the criteria for coverage. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the 
low dose computed tomography (CT) provided on June 20, 2022.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a ventilator. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a ventilator. 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 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 ventilator. Our reviewer says that the 
services are not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found a home ventilator is not medically necessary. There is no arterial blood gas (ABG) done while stable to document chronic carbon dioxide (CO2) 
retention, but if that is present, the enrollee may benefit from bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) with 
average volume-assured pressure support (AVAPS) during sleep. Medicare does not cover a home ventilator 
when used at settings that can be provided with BiPAP. 
 
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 ventilator have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not 
have to pre-approve a ventilator.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a Dexcom G7 sensor. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a Dexcom G7 sensor. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the 
enrollee is not on insulin at least once a day and does not have documentation of problematic hypoglycemia. 
 
  The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that therapeutic CGMs are considered medically 
reasonable and necessary for enrollees with diabetes who use insulin with at least three daily administrations, 
require frequent self-adjustment of insulin dosage based on the blood glucose testing results and have had an 
in-person visit with their treating physician to assess adherence to their CGM regimen and diabetes treatment 
plan. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. The documentation indicates that the enrollee does not use insulin 
with at least three daily injections. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of a 
Dexcom G7 sensor have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a 
Dexcom G7 sensor.