Home / Conditions / Asperger Syndrome

Asperger Syndrome: when insurers say no, reviewers often say yes

In 24 published external-review decisions involving asperger syndrome, independent physician reviewers overturned the insurer’s denial 58.3% of the time.

Published decisions
24
2001–2026
Overturned
58.3%
14 denials reversed

Most-fought treatments for asperger syndrome

What insurers denied — and how those fights ended.
CategoryDecisionsOverturned
Speech Therapy4
75%
Social Skills Thpy3
33.3%
RTC Admit3
66.7%
Occupational Therapy3
100%
Typical time to a decision
20 days
Most land between 6 and 21 days
Handled as urgent
33.3%
Expedited when a delay would cause harm
What the reviewers wrote
Excerpts from the independent reviewers’ published findings — the actual reasoning, quoted, not summarised.

Where the denial was overturned

Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested reimbursement for inpatient psychiatric hospitalization services. Findings: The physician reviewer found that due to the persistent affective symptom complex with disordered thought processing and violent behavior in context of autism spectrum disorder, a conservative psychiatric hospital stay was to be expected. Thus, the inpatient services provided in this case were reasonably expected to improve the patient’s condition and prevent a more serious episode of illness. Bipolar disorder is a chronic and debilitating mental illness. It is associated with poor clinical outcomes and erratic behaviors. The patient had been on a downward trend since late 2015. He was hospitalized earlier in 2016 and was not responding to outpatient treatment services. Upon presentation, the patient was violent, delusional and hypomanic.
Medical Necessity · 2016 · IMR MN16-23454
A 25-year-old female enrollee has requested psychotherapy twice a week with a PhD psychologist, monthly psychiatric appointment with Comprehensive Neurobehavioral Specialists (CNS) and applied behavioral analysis (ABA) therapy for treatment of her mental health conditions. Findings: The physician reviewer found that applied behavior analysis (ABA) is an empirically proven treatment intervention for children, adolescents and adults afflicted with autistic spectrum disorders. However, the documentation provided does not substantiate a diagnosis of Asperger’s disorder. Determination of this condition involves input from multiple disciplines and structured interviews.
Medical Necessity · 2012 · IMR MN12-14086

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested the central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) test for evaluation of his behavioral health condition. The physician reviewer found that the submitted documentation fails to establish the medical necessity of the requested services. In general, central auditory processing refers to several systems involved in both verbal and nonverbal communication. Since there are multiple proposed mechanisms, the term central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) is rather non-specific with regard to etiology. There is a lack of adequately-powered, well-designed studies demonstrating the usefulness of testing.
Medical Necessity · 2015 · IMR MN15-20632
The parent of a 16-year-old male enrollee has requested residential treatment for treatment of the enrollee’s behavioral health condition. Findings: The physician reviewer found that on the date indicated, the patient’s psychotropic medication was increased. The patient had a good visit home around the holidays. Thereafter, he had a successful programming trip to a designated location. On the date indicated, his disrespectfulness responded well to redirection. On the date indicated, he “felt more confident” and more “empathetic” with an improved ability to consider the perspectives of others and “much greater control over his emotional state.” His previous episodes of acting out were limited to conflict with rules. However, he was responding to redirection. Moreover, there was no evidence of psychiatric instability or safety concerns.
Medical Necessity · 2014 · IMR MN14-16071

Figures and quotations on this page come from 42,749 published decisions in the California DMHC Independent Medical Review dataset. These are California outcomes — every state runs an equivalent external review, but the rates here are California’s. Excerpts are quoted verbatim from the public record and describe this condition generally, not any individual case.

How to use this in your appeal

These outcomes come from California’s external review program — an independent physician panel whose decision binds the insurer. Every state has an equivalent, and internal appeals succeed even more often. If your care for asperger syndrome was denied, the published record says the denial is worth fighting.

SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DMHC INDEPENDENT MEDICAL REVIEW OUTCOMES (CHHS OPEN DATA) · DERIVED AGGREGATE STATISTICS ONLY · METHODOLOGY

Not legal or medical advice. Coverage Rights is a self-help tool that helps you prepare your own appeal. For advice about your specific situation, talk to a licensed attorney or your doctor.

Fighting a denial for asperger syndrome? 58.3% won.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39