Some Medicare Advantage Organization Denials of Prior Authorization Requests Raise Concerns About Beneficiary Access to Medically Necessary Care
Video: Medicare Advantage Denials of Care
WHY WE DID THIS STUDY
A central concern about the capitated payment model used in Medicare Advantage is the potential incentive for Medicare Advantage Organizations (MAOs) to deny beneficiary access to services and deny payments to providers in an attempt to increase profits. Although MAOs approve the vast majority of requests for services and payment, they issue millions of denials each year, and CMS annual audits of MAOs have highlighted widespread and persistent problems related to inappropriate denials of services and payment. As Medicare Advantage enrollment continues to grow, MAOs play an increasingly critical role in ensuring that Medicare beneficiaries have access to medically necessary covered services and that providers are reimbursed appropriately.
HOW WE DID THIS STUDY
We selected a stratified random sample of 250 prior authorization denials and 250 payment denials issued by 15 of the largest MAOs during June 1-7, 2019. Health care coding experts conducted case file reviews of all cases, and physician reviewers examined medical records for a subset of cases. From these results, we estimated the rates at which MAOs denied prior authorization and payment requests that met Medicare coverage and MAO billing rules. We also examined the reasons that these denials occurred and the types of services associated with these denials in our sample.
WHAT WE FOUND
Our case file reviews determined that MAOs sometimes delayed or denied Medicare Advantage beneficiaries' access to services, even though the requests met Medicare coverage rules. MAOs also denied payments to providers for some services that met both Medicare coverage rules and MAO billing rules. Denied requests that meet Medicare coverage rules may prevent or delay beneficiaries from receiving medically necessary care and can burden providers. Although some of the denials that we reviewed were ultimately reversed by the MAOs, avoidable delays and extra steps create friction in the program and may create an administrative burden for beneficiaries, providers, and MAOs. Examples of health care services involved in denials that met Medicare coverage rules included advanced imaging services (e.g., MRIs) and post-acute facility stays (e.g., inpatient rehabilitation).
Prior authorization requests. We found that, among the prior authorization requests that MAOs denied, 13 percent met Medicare coverage rules; in other words, these services likely would have been approved for these beneficiaries under original Medicare (also known as Medicare fee-for-service). We identified two common causes of these denials. First, MAOs used clinical criteria that are not contained in Medicare coverage rules (e.g., requiring an x-ray before approving more advanced imaging), which led them to deny requests for services that our physician reviewers determined were medically necessary. Although our review determined that the requests in these cases did meet Medicare coverage rules, CMS guidance is not sufficiently detailed to determine whether MAOs may deny authorization based on internal MAO clinical criteria that go beyond Medicare coverage rules.
Second, MAOs indicated that some prior authorization requests did not have enough documentation to support approval, yet our reviewers found that the existing beneficiary medical records were sufficient to support the medical necessity of the services.
Payment requests. We found that, among the payment requests that MAOs denied, 18 percent of the requests met Medicare coverage rules and MAO billing rules. Most of these payment denials in our sample were caused by human error during manual claims processing reviews (e.g., overlooking a document) and system processing errors (e.g., the MAO's system was not programmed or updated correctly).
We also found that MAOs reversed some of the denied prior authorization and payment requests that met Medicare coverage and MAO billing rules. Often the reversals occurred when a beneficiary or provider appealed or disputed the denial, and in some cases MAOs identified their own errors.
WHAT WE RECOMMEND
Our findings about the causes and circumstances under which MAOs denied prior authorization or payment for requests that met Medicare coverage and MAO billing rules provide an opportunity for improvement to ensure that Medicare Advantage beneficiaries have timely access to all necessary health care services, and that providers are paid appropriately. Therefore, we recommend that CMS:
- issue new guidance on the appropriate use of MAO clinical criteria in medical necessity reviews;
- update its audit protocols to address the issues identified in this report, such as MAO use of clinical criteria and/or examining particular service types; and
- direct MAOs to take additional steps to identify and address vulnerabilities that can lead to manual review errors and system errors.