Home / Conditions / Shoulder Problem

Shoulder Problem: when insurers say no, reviewers often say yes

In 122 published external-review decisions involving shoulder problem, independent physician reviewers overturned the insurer’s denial 35.2% of the time.

Published decisions
122
2001–2026
Overturned
35.2%
43 denials reversed

Most-fought treatments for shoulder problem

What insurers denied — and how those fights ended.
CategoryDecisionsOverturned
MRI23
26.1%
Physical Therapy15
40%
CPM Machine5
60%
Acupuncture4
75%
Emergency Room3
33.3%

What the insurer actually argued

Denials fall into different categories, and they don’t succeed equally — so the reason on your letter changes how you should answer it.
Reason givenDecisionsOverturned
Medical Necessity
The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable.
85
37.6%
Experimental/Investigational
The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument.
31
29%
Urgent Care
Expedited reviews, decided in days rather than weeks.
6
33.3%
Typical time to a decision
19 days
Most land between 11 and 21 days
Handled as urgent
18.9%
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

Physician 1: The patient is a 16-year-old female with a history of pelvic/groin pain. She has migratory pain in the lower abdominal quadrants and groin, right side greater than left. The pain is constant and always present, but can increase to as high as 7/10. She also complains of shoulder pain. She has a history of chronic bilateral frontal headaches, reported as migraines. She has undergone extensive workup in the past for the cause of her pain. Workup included multiple negative laboratory examinations, CT scans and abdominal pelvic ultrasounds. It also included extensive physical evaluations by multiple physicians. The patient has been evaluated and treated by a psychotherapist who feels no significant psychopathology is present. She has taken multiple medications including large doses of neuropathic pain medications such as Neurontin, trileptal, lidocaine and Ultram.
Experimental/Investigational · 2006 · IMR EI06-5630
Physician 1: This patient is a 49-year-old female with a history of refractory migraine and myofascial pain dating back to her multiple motor vehicle accidents in 1987. She states that the muscle pain can trigger her migraines. The patient achieves relief of her migraines with Relpax, but is requiring treatment often (1-2 times per week). Prior preventive treatments have failed including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and muscle relaxants, though no specific mention is made of any trials of migraine preventives. Physical medicine measures have apparently not relieved the patient’s myofascial pain either. The Health Plan has denied the patient’s request for authorization of Botox injections due to their determination that the therapy is experimental/investigational in nature.The patient’s myofascial pain is refractory, and standard pain management approaches have failed.
Experimental/Investigational · 2005 · IMR EI05-5000

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Physician 1: The patient is a 42-year-old male who experienced an injury while fighting a fire resulting in shoulder/periscapular pain that has persisted over 1.5 years. He has attempted conventional therapeutics including physical therapy, oral medications, home exercises and trigger injections without relief. Imaging of the spine showed no clinically relevant abnormalities. EMG showed no radiculopathy or plexopathy. A request has been made for authorization and coverage for Botox injections. The Health Plan has denied this request on the basis that Botox is considered investigational in this clinical setting.The patient has a myofascial pain syndrome status post trauma and surgery. The medical literature regarding Botox and pain relief is substantial when looking at dystonia as the underlying diagnosis.
Experimental/Investigational · 2005 · IMR EI05-4958
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for electromyography (EMG) of the left shoulder blade muscles (supraspinatus plus infraspinatus muscles), nerve conduction study (NCS) of the left shoulder blade muscles (supraspinatus plus infraspinatus muscles), ultrasound of the left shoulder, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with contrast of the left knee for evaluation of his chronic pain and numbness. Findings: The physician reviewer found that the requested EMG and NCS of the left supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscles are not medically necessary for evaluation of this patient’s medical condition.
Medical Necessity · 2017 · IMR MN17-25353

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 shoulder problem 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 shoulder problem? 35.2% won.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39