2023 Montana Code Annotated › Title 33. Insurance and Insurance Companies › Chapter 32. Health Utilization Review › Part 4. External Review › 33-32-417. Minimum qualifications for independent review organizations

33-32-417. Minimum qualifications for independent review organizations.
(1) To be approved to conduct external reviews as provided in 33-32-416, an independent review organization shall establish and maintain written policies and procedures that govern all aspects of both the standard external review process and the expedited external review process set forth in 33-32-410 through 33-32-412. The written policies and procedures must include, at a minimum:
(a) a quality assurance mechanism that ensures:
(i) that external reviews are conducted within the specified timeframes and that required notices are provided in a timely manner;
(ii) that the independent review organization is unbiased;
(iii) both the selection of qualified and impartial clinical peers to conduct external reviews on behalf of the independent review organization and the suitable matching of reviewers to specific cases;
(iv) that the independent review organization employs or contracts with an adequate number of clinical peers to meet the objective of qualified, impartial reviews;
(v) the confidentiality of medical and treatment records as well as clinical review criteria; and
(vi) that any person employed by or under contract with the independent review organization adheres to the requirements of this part;
(b) a toll-free telephone service to receive information related to external reviews on a 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week basis. The telephone service must be capable of accepting, recording, or providing appropriate instruction to incoming telephone callers during other-than-normal business hours.
(c) an agreement to maintain and provide to the commissioner the information required under 33-32-421.
(2) All clinical peers assigned by an independent review organization to conduct external reviews must:
(a) be appropriate health care providers; and
(b) meet the following minimum qualifications:
(i) be an expert in the treatment of the covered person's medical condition that is the subject of the external review;
(ii) be knowledgeable about the recommended health care service or treatment through recent or current actual clinical experience treating patients with the same or similar medical conditions of the covered person;
(iii) hold a nonrestricted professional license in a state of the United States and, for physicians, a current certification by a recognized American medical specialty board in one or more areas appropriate to the subject of the external review; and
(iv) have no history of disciplinary actions or sanctions, including participation restrictions or a loss of staff privileges either taken or pending by any hospital, government agency, governmental unit, or regulatory body if the disciplinary actions or sanctions raise a substantial question as to the clinical peer's physical, mental, or professional competence or moral character.
(3) In addition to the requirements in subsection (1), an independent review organization may not own or control, be a subsidiary of, or in any way be owned or controlled by or exercise control over a health plan, a health insurance issuer, a national, state, or local trade association of health plans, or a national, state, or local trade association of health care providers.
(4) (a) In addition to the requirements in subsections (1) through (3), to be approved under 33-32-416 to conduct an external review of a specified case, neither the independent review organization selected to conduct the external review nor any clinical peer assigned by the independent review organization to conduct the external review may have a material professional, familial, or financial conflict of interest with any of the following:
(i) the health insurance issuer that is the subject of the external review;
(ii) the covered person whose treatment is the subject of the external review or, if applicable, the covered person's authorized representative;
(iii) any officer, director, or management employee of the health insurance issuer that is the subject of the external review;
(iv) the health care provider, the health care provider's medical group, or the independent practice association recommending the health care service or treatment that is the subject of the external review;
(v) the facility at which the recommended health care service or treatment would be provided; or
(vi) the developer or manufacturer of the principal drug, device, procedure, or other therapy being recommended for the covered person whose treatment is the subject of the external review.
(b) In determining whether an independent review organization or a clinical peer assigned by the independent review organization to conduct the external review has a material professional, familial, or financial conflict of interest, the commissioner shall take into consideration:
(i) situations in which the independent review organization to be assigned to conduct an external review of a specified case or a clinical peer to be assigned by the independent review organization to conduct an external review of a specified case may have an apparent professional, familial, or financial relationship or connection with a person described in subsection (4)(a) if the characteristics of that relationship or connection do not pose a material professional, familial, or financial conflict of interest that otherwise would result in the disapproval of the independent review organization or of the clinical peer from conducting the external review; and
(ii) whether other medical expertise is available within a reasonable timeframe.
(5) (a) An independent review organization that is accredited by a nationally recognized private accrediting entity that has independent review accreditation standards determined by the commissioner to be equivalent to or exceed the minimum qualifications of this section is presumed to be in compliance with this section and eligible for approval under 33-32-416. However, the commissioner shall also consider the conflict of interest provisions of subsection (4).
(b) The commissioner shall initially and periodically review the independent review organization accreditation standards of a nationally recognized private accrediting entity to determine whether the entity's standards are and continue to be equivalent to or exceed the minimum qualifications established under this section. The commissioner may accept a review conducted by the NAIC for the determination under this subsection (5)(b).
(c) On request, a nationally recognized private accrediting entity shall make its current independent review organization accreditation standards available to the commissioner or the NAIC to enable the commissioner to determine if the entity's standards are equivalent to or exceed the minimum qualifications established under this section. The commissioner may exclude any private accrediting entity that is not reviewed by the NAIC.
History: En. Sec. 27, Ch. 428, L. 2015; amd. Sec. 43, Ch. 151, L. 2017.