IN THE MATTER OF: Docket No. 2012-53891 QHP Case No. DECISION AND ORDER



Similar documents
Docket No QHP Case No. DECISION AND ORDER

Case No. DECISION AND ORDER

IN THE MATTER OF: Docket No TRN Case No DECISION AND ORDER

IN THE MATTER OF: Docket No CL, Case No. DECISION AND ORDER

IN THE MATTER OF: Docket No EDW DECISION AND ORDER

IN THE MATTER OF: Docket No EDW 8 DECISION AND ORDER

IN THE MATTER OF: Docket No EDW, Case No DECISION AND ORDER

IN THE MATTER OF: Docket No SAS Case No. DECISION AND ORDER

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, LABOR & ECONOMIC GROWTH OFFICE OF FINANCIAL AND INSURANCE REGULATION

DECISION AND ORDER. After due notice, a hearing was held on. (Appellant) appeared and testified on her own behalf.

Issued and entered this _6th_ day of October 2010 by Ken Ross Commissioner ORDER I PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES

HEARING DECISION. Did the Department correctly determine the Claimant s community spouse income allowance? FINDINGS OF FACT

STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES HEARING DECISION

v File No Aetna Life Insurance Company Respondent Issued and entered this 5 th day of December 2011 by R. Kevin Clinton Commissioner

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES

STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES HEARING DECISION

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES BUREAU OF HEARINGS. Agency No.

COMPENSATION ORDER TIMOTHY BURROUGHS, ) Claimant, ) ) AHD No v. ) OWC No J & J MAINTENANCE, INC., ) and ) AIG CLAIMS SERVICES, )

STATE OF MICHIGAN STATE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND RULES ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES

Notice of Independent Review Decision DESCRIPTION OF THE SERVICE OR SERVICES IN DISPUTE:

STATE OF MICHIGAN STATE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND RULES. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES him

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

SOAH DOCKET NO M2 TWCC MR NO. M ' ' ' ' ' ' ' DECISION AND ORDER I. JURISDICTION, NOTICE, AND VENUE

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES BUREAU OF HEARINGS. Agency No.

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD. DECISION OF MEDICARE APPEALS COUNCIL Docket Number: M

STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES HEARING DECISION

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES BUREAU OF HEARINGS. Agency No.

STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES HEARING DECISION

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

The Healthy Michigan Plan Handbook

Getting Medi-Cal Outpatient Specialty Mental Health Services

S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N WORKERS COMPENSATION APPELLATE COMMISSION

MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING PAMPHLET

BEFORE THE ALASKA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS. In the Matter of ) ) K L. V ) OAH No PER ) Div. R&B No

Department of Health and Human Services DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD. Civil Remedies Division

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD. DECISION OF MEDICARE APPEALS COUNCIL Docket Number: M

How To Get An Mri Of The Lumbar Spine W/O Contrast

STATE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS 300 West 15th Street, Suite 502 Austin, Texas ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I. Background Facts

GEORGIA MEDICAID TELEMEDICINE HANDBOOK

Employees Compensation Appeals Board

STATE OF MICHIGAN STATE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND RULES ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES

The Healthy Michigan Plan Handbook

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS MEMORANDUM DECISION

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

Chapter 4 Health Care Management Unit 1: Care Management

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES Before the Director of Insurance and Financial Services

Issued and entered This 26 th day of February 2008 by Ken Ross Commissioner ORDER I PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

DOCKET NO M5 MDR Tracking No. M CROWNE CHIROPRACTIC BEFORE THE STATE OFFICE CLINIC, Petitioner VS. OF

How To Prove That A Letter Carrier'S Work Caused A Cervical Disc Herniation

IMPORTANT NOTICE NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION

Frequently Asked Questions about Fee-for-Service Medicare For People with Alzheimer s Disease

this 7^ day of September 2014 by Randall S. Gregg Special Deputy Director

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

SUMMARY DECISION NO. 143/97. Suitable employment.

A M E R I C A N A R B I T R A T I O N A S S O C I A T I O N NO-FAULT/ACCIDENT CLAIMS AWARD OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD DECISION OF MEDICARE APPEALS COUNCIL

Workplace Health, Safety & Compensation Review Division

A Patient s Guide to Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH)

STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES HEARING DECISION

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

What is a Fair Hearing?

Test Request Tip Sheet

HEARING DECISION PROCEDURAL HISTORY

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES Before the Director of Insurance and Financial Services

Division of Hearings and Appeals

Measure Title X RAY PRIOR TO MRI OR CAT SCAN IN THE EVAULATION OF LOWER BACK PAIN Disease State Back pain Indicator Classification Utilization

Department of Health and Human Services DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD. Civil Remedies Division

Nonoperative Management of Herniated Cervical Intervertebral Disc With Radiculopathy. Spine Volume 21(16) August 15, 1996, pp

MEDICAL ASSOCIATES HEALTH PLANS HEALTH CARE SERVI CES POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL POLICY NUMBER: PP 60

SOAH DOCKET NO M4 DWC NO. DECISION AND ORDER I. DISCUSSION

NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL

XXXXX Petitioner File No v. Issued and entered this 28 th day of April 2011 by R. Kevin Clinton Commissioner ORDER

Healthy Michigan MEMBER HANDBOOK

CASE NO. 1D Therese A. Savona, Chief Appellate Counsel, Florida Department of Health, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

Minnesota Department of Human Services

International Postprofessional Doctoral of Physical Therapy (DPT) in Musculoskeletal Management Program (non US/Canada) Curriculum

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE FACILITATION. Cherise Neville Senior Attorney Office of the Chief Judge

Radiology Prior Authorization Program Frequently Asked Questions for the UnitedHealthcare Community Plan

BEFORE THE KANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD

Radiology Prior Authorization Program Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) For AmeriChoice by UnitedHealthcare, Tennessee

United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER

DOCKET NO M5 MDR Tracking No. M TEXAS IMAGING AND DIAGNOSTIC BEFORE THE STATE OFFICE CENTER PETITIONER

Chapter WAC All Payer Claims Database

X Stop Spinal Stenosis Decompression

BlueAdvantage SM Health Management

DECISION POINT REVIEW AND PRE-CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS UNDER YOUR AUTO POLICY

Department of Health and Human Services DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD. Civil Remedies Division. Steve McFarland, ACNP, Petitioner,

Issued and entered this 30 th day of September 2008 by Ken Ross Commissioner ORDER I PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Ruling No Date: December 1998

Clinical guidance for MRI referral

General Information on Representing Yourself in a Workers Compensation Case

A M E R I C A N A R B I T R A T I O N A S S O C I A T I O N NO-FAULT/ACCIDENT CLAIMS AWARD OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND INDUSTRY SERVICES BUREAU OF HEARINGS

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

Department of Health and Human Services DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD. Civil Remedies Division

Transcription:

STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY HEALTH P.O. Box 30763, Lansing, MI 48909 (877) 833-0870; Fax: (517) 334-9505 IN THE MATTER OF: Docket No. 2012-53891 QHP Case No. Appellant / DECISION AND ORDER This matter is before the undersigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) pursuant to MCL 400.9 and 42 CFR 431.200 et seq., following the Appellant's request for a hearing. After due notice, a hearing was held. appeared on own behalf. on ( ). present. ISSUE Did the MHP properly deny Appellant s request for Magnetic Resonance Imaging ( MRI ) of the lower back? FINDINGS OF FACT Based upon the competent, material, and substantial evidence presented, I find, as material fact: 1. The Appellant is a Medicaid beneficiary who is currently enrolled in the Respondent MHP. 2. On or about, the received a request for MRI L-spine without contrast from the Appellant s physician. The request indicates that the Appellant has been diagnosed with low back pain. (Exhibit 1, pages 11-13) 3. On the sent the Appellant a denial notice stating that the request for MRI lumbar spine was denied for medical necessity because the submitted documentation did not meet the InterQual Imaging,

MRI, lumbar spine criteria as the InterQual guidelines require examination findings including documentation of weakness, or abnormal reflexes, or abnormal plain x-rays and a trial of conservative therapy like medications and physical therapy or a home exercise program. (Exhibit 1, pages 14-17) 4. On the Appellant s Request for Hearing was received by the Michigan Administrative Hearing System. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Medical Assistance Program is established pursuant to Title XIX of the Social Security Act and is implemented by Title 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). It is administered in accordance with state statute, the Social Welfare Act, the Administrative Code, and the State Plan under Title XIX of the Social Security Act Medical Assistance Program. On May 30, 1997, the Department received approval from the Health Care Financing Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, allowing Michigan to restrict Medicaid beneficiaries' choice to obtain medical services only from specified Medicaid Health Plans. The Respondent is one of those Medicaid Health Plans. The covered services that the Contractor has available for enrollees must include, at a minimum, the covered services listed below (List omitted by Administrative Law Judge). The Contractor may limit s ervices to those whic h are m edically necessary and appropriate, and which conform t o professionally accepted standards of care. Contractors must operate c onsistent wit h all applic able M edicaid provider manuals and public ations fo r c overage(s) and limit ations. (Emphasis added by ALJ) If new services are added to the Michigan Medicaid Program, or if services are expanded, eliminated, or otherwise changed, the Contractor must implement the changes consistent with State direction in accordance with the provisions of Contract Section 1-Z. Article II-G, Scope of Comprehensive Benefit Package. MDCH contract (Contract) with the Medicaid Health Plans, September 30, 2004. The major components of the Contractor s utilization management plan must encompass, at a minimum, the following: 2

Written policies with review decision criteria and procedures that conform to managed health care industry standards and processes. A formal utilization review committee directed by the Contractor s medical director to oversee the utilization review process. Sufficient resources to regularly review the effectiveness of the utilization review process and to make changes to the process as needed. An annual review and reporting of utilization review activities and outcomes/interventions from the review. The Contractor must establish and use a written prior approval policy and procedure for utilization management purposes. The Contractor may not use such policies and procedures to avoid providing medically necessary services within the coverage(s) established under the Contract. The policy must ensure that the review criteria for authorization decisions are applied consistently and require that the reviewer consult with the requesting provider when appropriate. The policy must also require that utilization management decisions be made by a health care professional who has appropriate clinical expertise regarding the service under review. Article II-P, Utilization Management, Contract, September 30, 2004. As stated in the contract language above, a must operate consistent with all applicable Medicaid Provider Manuals and publications for coverages and limitations. The pertinent section of the Michigan Medicaid Provider Manual (MPM) states: 10.1 RADIOLOGY SERVICES Medically necessary radiological services are covered when ordered by a physician to diagnose or treat a specific condition based on the beneficiary s signs, symptoms, and past history as documented in the medical record. Radiology services include diagnostic and therapeutic radiology, nuclear medicine, CT scan procedures, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) services, diagnostic ultrasound, and other imaging procedures. Medical need for all services must be documented in the medical record and are subject to post-payment review. 3

Michigan Department of Community Health, Medicaid Provider Manual, Practitioner Version Date: April 1, 2012, Page 52. The contract provisions allow prior approval procedures for utilization management purposes. The Inquiry Dispute Appeals Resolution Coordinator explained that for a lower back MRI, the MHP reviews prior approval requests under the InterQual Imaging, MRI Lumbar Spine Criteria. (Exhibit 1, pages 2-10) The InterQual guidelines, in part, state: While MRI is becoming a routine part of the preoperative evaluation for chronic low back pain, its use in this context is considered controversial because the efficacy of the surgery itself remains unproven. Requests for MRI for chronic back pain without underlying pathology requires secondary medical review. (Exhibit 1, page 5) The clinical note submitted with the prior authorization request indicates the Appellant has back pain (lumbar) and a history of disc disease. (Exhibit 1, page 12) The InterQual MRI lumbar spine guideline for the indication of degenerative disk disease requires: 400 Degenerative disc disease by x-ray [All] 410 Back pain interferes with ADLs 420 No neurologic Sx/findings 430 X-ray findings [All] 431 Disc space narrowing 432 Osteophyte formation 433 End-plate sclerosis 440 Continued symptoms after Rx [All] 441 NSAID [One] -1 RX 3 wks -2 Contraindicated/not tolerated 442 Activity modification 6 wks 450 Preoperative evaluation The denied the prior authorization request because the submitted documentation showed lower back pain with tenderness, but did not include: examination findings documenting weakness or abnormal reflexes, abnormal plain x-rays, and a trial of conservative therapy like medications and physical therapy or a home exercise program. (Exhibit 1, pages 1 and 14) 4

The Appellant disagrees with the denial and testified that x-rays have been taken recently. (Appellant Testimony) Under its contract with the Department, an may devise criterion for coverage of medically necessary services, as long as those criteria do not effectively avoid providing medically necessary services. The s MRI lumbar spine prior approval process is consistent with Medicaid policy and allowable under the contract provisions. The demonstrated that based on the submitted documentation, the Appellant did not meet criteria for approval of an MRI lumbar spine. While low back pain and a history of disc disease was documented, the information submitted did not include x-ray, findings or documentation to establish that other guideline criteria, such as a trial of conservative therapy, were met. The s determination is upheld. The Appellant may wish to have her doctor submit a new prior authorization request to the MHP with additional documentation supporting that the criteria for MRI lumbar spine have been met, such as the recent x-ray findings, additional examination findings and any trials of conservative therapy. DECISION AND ORDER The Administrative Law Judge, based on the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, decides that the MHP properly denied the Appellant s request for an MRI of the lower back based on the submitted documentation. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: The Medicaid Health Plan s decision is AFFIRMED. cc: Colleen Lack Administrative Law Judge for Olga Dazzo, Director Michigan Department of Community Health Date Signed: Date Mailed: 5

*** NOTICE *** The Michigan Administrative Hearing System may order a rehearing on either its own motion or at the request of a party within 30 days of the mailing date of this. The Michigan Administrative Hearing System will not order a rehearing on the Department s motion where the final decision or rehearing cannot be implemented within 90 days of the filing of the original request. The Appellant may appeal the to Circuit Court within 30 days of the receipt of the Decision and Order or, if a timely request for rehearing was made, within 30 days of the receipt of the rehearing decision. 6