Dry Eye Disease denials in California external review

In the California DMHC record, independent physician reviewers decided 15 published external-review cases involving dry eye diseaseand overturned the plan’s denial in 73.3%. That is a historical result among cases that reached this program, not a forecast for an individual appeal.

California DMHC decisions
15
2005–2026
Overturned
73.3%
11 denials reversed
Typical time to a decision
12 days
Most land between 5 and 21 days
Handled as urgent
46.7%
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

Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: A patient has requested reimbursement and prospective authorization and coverage for Tyrvaya. The patient has chronic bilateral dry eye disease that developed following cataract surgery, a clinical condition associated with disruption of tear film homeostasis and corneal sensory nerve function.The patient’s symptoms include fluctuating vision, ocular discomfort, pressure, and episodic migraine-like sensations consistent with tear film instability and a sensory component of dry eye disease. Conservative therapies, including warm compresses, lubricating eye drops, and omega-3 supplementation, have been insufficient to control symptoms.
Medical Necessity · 2026 · IMR MN26-46698
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and overage for brand name Lotemax 0.5% ophthalmic suspension. Medical literature note that dry eye disease is a common ocular condition that may be effectively treated by topical corticosteroids. The authors further note that loteprednol (brand name Lotemax) is safe and well tolerated, with minimal effects on intraocular pressure. Loteprednol is a type of synthetic steroid with advantages over standard steroids, such as dexamethasone and prednisolone, as it acts mostly on the surface of the eye and does not lead to cataract development, which may be a side effect of standard steroids. In this case, the records noted that the patient had tried both the generic and brand formulations of loteprednol, and reported that her symptoms were better using the brand formulation.
Medical Necessity · 2021 · IMR MN21-36109

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: A patient has requested authorization and coverage for VEVYE (cyclosporine ophthalmic solution). Dry eye disease is a complex, multifactorial condition characterized by tear film instability, ocular surface inflammation, neurosensory dysfunction, and damage. It is a cyclical, multifactorial disease in which identifying and addressing the underlying cause is essential to breaking the cycle and restoring ocular surface homeostasis. This requires a personalized treatment plan. Therapeutic options include various strengths of cyclosporine, cholinergic agonists, semi fluorinated alkanes, corticosteroids, and procedural interventions such as intense pulsed light therapy or thermal pulsation.
Medical Necessity · 2025 · IMR MN25-44624
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for Cequa 0.09% eye solution. Findings: In a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial of patients with an eye dryness score (EDS) of at least 40, a study concluded that lifitegrast, the active ingredient in Xiidra, significantly improved symptoms of eye dryness versus placebo, as measured by EDS. In a multicenter, randomized, double-masked, vehicle controlled study, it was found that 20.5% of study participants receiving Cequa 0.09% achieved a greater than or equal to ten mm increase in their Schirmer’s tear score, compared to 11.3% of study participants receiving vehicle, and that Cequa 0.09% significantly improved total conjunctival staining over vehicle at week 12. However, these results have so far not been replicated and independently verified by other studies.
Medical Necessity · 2022 · IMR MN22-37498

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.

How to use this in your appeal

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 dry eye disease, 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

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 dry eye disease? Use the California record to prepare.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $9