Non-suicidal Self-injury denials in California external review
In the California DMHC record, independent physician reviewers decided 13 published external-review cases involving non-suicidal self-injuryand overturned the plan’s denial in 69.2%. That is a historical result among cases that reached this program, not a forecast for an individual appeal.
Most-fought treatments for non-suicidal self-injury
| Category | Decisions | Overturned |
|---|---|---|
| Residential Treatment Center | 5 | 60% |
What the reviewers wrote
Where the denial was overturned
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient’s parent has requested reimbursement and prospective authorization and coverage for residential treatment center (RTC) services. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and the American Association of Community Psychiatrists Child and Adolescent Level of Care Utilization System (CALOCUS) provides a reliable framework for determining the appropriate level of care for adolescents needing mental health treatment. Using CALOCUS, providers score patients on a scale of 1-5 using a six-pronged Dimensional Rating System. The six dimensions include: (1) risk of harm; (2) functional status; (3) developmental, medical, substance use and psychiatric comorbidity; (4) recovery environment (a. stressors and b. supports); (5) treatment and recovery history; and (6) engagement.
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for a return to partial hospitalization program (PHP). The American Association of Community Psychiatrists Level of Care Utilization System (LOCUS) provides a reliable framework for determining the appropriate level of care for adults needing mental health treatment. Using LOCUS, providers score patients on a scale of 1-5 using a six-pronged Dimensional Rating System. The six dimensions include: (1) risk of harm; (2) functional status; (3) medical, addictive and psychiatric comorbidity; (4) recovery environment (a. stressors and b. supports); (5) treatment and recovery history; and (6) engagement. The composite score is then used to determine the level of care needed. For dimension 1, with regard to risk of harm, the records support a score of 4.
Where the denial was upheld
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient’s parent has requested reimbursement for psychiatric residential treatment center (RTC) services. The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP) and American Association for Community Psychiatry (AACP) have unified the Child and Adolescent Level of Care Utilization System (CALOCUS) and the Child and Adolescent Service Intensity Instrument (CASII) into a single instrument, the Child and Adolescent Level of Care/Service Intensity Utilization System (CALOCUS-CASII). This instrument is a standardized tool used to determine the intensity of services needed for children and adolescents, 6-18 years of age, presenting with psychiatric, substance use, medical and/or developmental concerns. Using CALOCUS-CASII, providers score patients on a scale of 1-5 using a six-pronged Dimensional Rating System.
The parent of a 17-year-old female enrollee requested mental health residential treatment center services for treatment of the enrollee’s behavioral health conditions. Findings: The physician reviewer found that the medical records indicate that the patient was cooperative with her treatment and processed information well. She was not noted to be suicidal or homicidal. She had two episodes of cutting during the month of treatment. In each case, she was able to process the information in group and individual therapy and understand the stressors that led her to her decision to cut. She did not exhibit any behavior problems other than these two incidents that would have required 24-hour medical or nursing care, and on these two occasions, the staff did not directly witness the event or intervene.
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 non-suicidal self-injury, 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