Plantar Fasciitis: when insurers say no, reviewers often say yes

Where the denial was overturned

Physician 1: The patient is a 51-year-old man with a documented history of plantar fasciitis. The patient is also a diabetic. His provider indicates the patient has tried multiple conservative treatment attempts including corticosteroid injections without success. The patient’s provider has recommended the patient undergo extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT). The Health Plan has denied authorization for the proposed procedure on the basis that it is considered investigational.Review of the medical literature reveals there is sufficient Class I data supporting ESWT for the treatment of plantar fasciitis. The recent article by Kudo and colleagues clearly establishes the efficacy of the treatment. This is in addition to an article by Hyer, which demonstrates the clinical utility of ESWT in the treatment of plantar fasciitis.

Physician 1: The patient is a 64-year-old male with chronic plantar fasciitis. He has attempted medications, heel supports, injections, and surgery without benefit. He is now requesting extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT). The Health Plan has denied his request on the basis that ESWT is considered investigational.Although the long-term efficacy of ESWT is not yet known on a prospective basis, there has been some success on a short-term basis. ESWT has lower risk and is not as invasive as repeat surgery would be for this patient. In this case, the patient has prolonged pain despite all available standard therapy.

Where the denial was upheld

Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested reimbursement for magnetic resonance imaging of left heel and left knee. Findings: The physician reviewer found that The patient denied plantar fasciitis pain with palpation. Researchers explain, “Advanced imaging modalities, including computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and dynamic fluoroscopic imaging, allow for a comprehensive evaluation of the knee joint. Compositional sequences for MRI can allow for an evaluation of the biochemical properties of cartilage, meniscus, and ligament that offer further insight into pathology that may not be apparent on conventional clinical imaging.

Physician 1: The patient is a 56-year-old female who has a history of foot pain due to plantar fasciitis. She underwent bilateral bunionectomies in 1996 and has reactive arthritis. The patient’s physician indicates the patient has failed conservative therapies including immobilization, orthotics, and injections. The patient continues to have pain. Her physician has recommended extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) as opposed to open plantar fascia release to relieve her symptoms. The Health Plan has denied coverage for ESWT on the basis it is considered investigational.Extracorporeal shock wave therapy is not considered to be the standard of care. To date, long-term prospective studies of the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave therapy have not been performed.

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 plantar fasciitis was denied, the published record says the denial is worth fighting.