Dizziness Vertigo denials in California external review
In the California DMHC record, independent physician reviewers decided 22 published external-review cases involving dizziness vertigoand overturned the plan’s denial in 50%. That is a historical result among cases that reached this program, not a forecast for an individual appeal.
What the insurer actually argued
| Reason given | Decisions | Overturned |
|---|---|---|
Medical Necessity The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable. | 13 | 38.5% |
Experimental/Investigational The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument. | 8 | 62.5% |
What the reviewers wrote
Where the denial was overturned
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: A 67-year-old female enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for functional endoscopic sinus surgery and septoplasty.. The Health Plan has denied this request indicating that the requested procedures are not medically necessary for treatment of the enrollee’s deviated nasal septum; nasal turbinate hypertrophy; chronic sinus infection; chronic sinusitis; and nasal polyps.At issue in this case is whether the requested functional endoscopic sinus surgery and septoplasty are medically necessary for treatment of the patient’s medical condition.Per researchers, nasal polyps cause nasal obstruction, discharge and reduction in or loss of sense of smell, but their etiology is unknown.
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested reimbursement for vestibular rehabilitation services. Researchers report that in persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD) and related disorders, vestibular rehabilitation combined with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and possibly supported by medication, may help patients escape a cycle of maladaptive balance control, recalibrate vestibular systems, and regain independence in daily life. The authors note that PPPD may be managed with effective communication and tailored treatment strategies including specialized physical therapy such as vestibular rehabilitation, serotonergic medications, and CBT.
Where the denial was upheld
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for alternative surgical positioning, without laying the patient flat and without inverting the patient, during total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy surgery. Laparotomy, laparoscopic, and robotic hysterectomy are all surgical approaches for the removal of the uterus. Several factors should be considered in determining which approach to select, including the indication for the hysterectomy, the size and position of the uterus, the presence of other pelvic pathologies, patient factors, and surgeon expertise. Laparotomy involves a larger abdominal incision and is generally reserved for situations when laparoscopy is not feasible. Laparoscopic hysterectomy is minimally invasive and is associated with a shorter hospital stay, less postoperative pain, and faster recovery.
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for a computed tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) or angiography and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) scan. The Health Plan has denied this request indicating that the requested diagnostic procedures are not medically necessary for evaluation of the enrollee’s dizziness. The requested for CT scan, MRS or angiography and MRA scan are not medically necessary for evaluation of the patient’s medical condition. In this case, the patient has a history of dizziness without evidence of other neurologic deficits. Symptoms have been present for at least four years, and the patient has been seen by a neurologist, who did not detect an underlying disease. In addition, the patient underwent an MRI of the brain in 2016 which was negative.
Figures and quotations on this page come from 42,749 published decisions in the California DMHC Independent Medical Review dataset. These are California external-review outcomes. Other state and federal programs have different eligibility rules, processes, and current availability; the rates here do not transfer to those programs or predict an individual result. Excerpts are quoted verbatim from the public record and describe this condition generally, not any individual case.
These outcomes describe eligible cases completed through California DMHC’s Independent Medical Review program. They do not estimate the chance that an internal appeal, an external review in another jurisdiction, or your individual case will succeed. Use the record to identify evidence patterns involving dizziness vertigo, then check the rights and deadlines that apply to your plan.
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DMHC INDEPENDENT MEDICAL REVIEW OUTCOMES (CHHS OPEN DATA) · AGGREGATES + DEIDENTIFIED DECISION EXCERPTS/REFERENCE IDS · METHODOLOGY