
Originally Posted by
Hmac
Peer-to-peer is a joke. It's basically a conversation with the insurance company's Medical Director wherein I have to justify to him/her why a given operation or treatment that they have denied is justified. We have not had a high success rate letting that conversation take place between the Medical Director and an APRN. Those Medical Directors are generally a primary care doctor (not surgeon) who has been long out of active practice and may or may not even have an active medical license. They have not seen or examined this patient and usually have no clue about the nature of the operation that that patient needs. They exist to bring the "credibility" of an MD to the insurance company's denials, which was usually issued initially by a non-medical reviewer basing the denial off a list of criteria in a book on their desk. These Medical Directors typically don't read ANY current medical literature, let alone surgical literature so my discussion with them is a general review of the anatomy, physiology, and current literature that supports the proposed operation. They tend to be frustrating, time-consuming phone conversations that often end up with an arbitrary denial despite the evidence. I actually get very few denials these days, ever since I started opening the conversation by saying "Doctor, this conversation is being recorded to make sure there are no misunderstandings if we end up taking the case to the State Insurance Commissioner's office...".
Yep. And as a surgical Subspecialist I am frequently talking to a family medicine “peer” doing the peer to peer, who tells me in short order that he has no idea what I’m talking about and needs to refer this to someone in my specialty.
SLG Defense 07/02 FFL/SOT
Bookmarks