A new Biden administration rule released Wednesday aims to streamline the prior authorization process used by insurers to approve medical procedures and treatments.

Prior authorization is a common tool used by insurers but much maligned by doctors and patients, who say it’s often used to deny doctor-recommended care.

Under the final rule from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, health insurers participating in Medicare Advantage, Medicaid or the ObamaCare exchanges will need to respond to expedited prior authorization requests within 72 hours, and standard requests within seven calendar days.

The rule requires all impacted payers to include a specific reason for denying a prior authorization request. They will also be required to publicly report prior authorization metrics.

  • Froyn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    LPT: If your doctor firmly believes that you require X treatment/medication/etc. Have them use the specific term “medically necessary”. If your insurer kicks it back with that phrasing attached, contact them. Ask for the medical license number of the doctor who indicated that it was not medically necessary. Push for this information (they won’t have it) and continue the line of “Someone on your end is making a medical decision against my doctors orders. I require their credentials so I can confirm they are a) qualified to make medical decisions, and b) have a higher education that my doctor possesses.”

      • Froyn@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I speak from experience. Blue Cross has not argued or denied any of our doctors’ requests since the second time I used that method.
        Had a specialist tell my wife she needed a shoulder replacement. Insurance wanted her to do physical therapy. I was livid. “I want the license number of the doctor on your end who is deciding that physical therapy is going to some how magically fix torn rotator cuff tendons. Telling our medical specialist that physical therapy is required is a medical decision that contradicts their diagnosis that it needs replaced. If we follow your recommendation and it fails, I need the name and license number of who to go after for making that decision. Shielding this professional, and I use that term loosely, indicates that you’re willing to assume all the liability when “physical therapy” causes more pain and damage.”

      • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s nonsense. For one, what is required for a treatment is handled by CMS and the CPT code itself, so the necessary documentation is either there or it isn’t and adding “medically necessary” doesn’t change a damn thing. Secondly, the commercial payors go by their own schedules for what is always, is never, and can be “medically necessary,” “experimental,” “diagnostic-only,” and a ton more. If your orthopedic surgeon is calling for a prior auth for a total knee replacement, it’s always medically necessary; peripheral vein ablation, it’s sometimes medically necessary; chin implant, never necessary.

        • Froyn@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          Then I’m full of shit and my wife’s reverse shoulder joint is a figment of our collective imaginations.

          • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            It’s not one or the other. You’re full of shit and your wife would have gotten her reverse total joint surgery regardless.

            • Fedizen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Insurers are known to automatically deny procedures based on what is essentially a flow chart (illegal) rather than a medical professional review of the case (required by law). This is why most insurers back down when a prior authorization is requested.

              The whole process is being abused by insurers and if you ask doctors, nurses, pharmacists they’ll tell you the process is being abused.

  • breadsmasher@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    the madness that is US “healthcare” never ceases to amaze me.

    Know what happens when a doctor recommends me a treatment? I get that treatment.

    I don’t have to hope an insurance company will “approve” of me getting that treatment. I don’t have to worry about paying for it.

    Anyone still defending this system needs psychological help. Which would be denied by the insurance company. And cost 10000s out of pocket

    • 𝕱𝖎𝖗𝖊𝖜𝖎𝖙𝖈𝖍@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Anyone still defending this system needs psychological help. Which would be denied by the insurance company. And cost 10000s out of pocket

      Approximately half the country supports it because it hurts people they don’t like, and they’re about to elect a literal dictator. Please send help