Home / Treatments / Bone Density Scan

Bone Density Scan denials: what the review data shows

Independent reviewers have decided 76 published cases where an insurer denied Bone Density Scan — and they overturned the insurer 36.8% of the time. A denial for Bone Density Scan is a starting position, not a final answer.

Published decisions
76
2001–2026
Overturned
36.8%
28 denials reversed

Conditions behind bone density scan denials

What insurers denied — and how those fights ended.
CategoryDecisionsOverturned
Osteoporosis37
43.2%
Breast3
66.7%
Osteoarthritis3
0%

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.
49
32.7%
Experimental/Investigational
The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument.
27
44.4%
Typical time to a decision
21 days
Most land between 17 and 21 days
What the reviewers wrote
Excerpts from the independent reviewers’ published findings — the actual reasoning, quoted, not summarised.

Where the denial was overturned

Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested peripheral bone mineral density (BMD) testing and breast tomosynthesis for evaluation of her medical condition. Findings: Two physician reviewers found that breast tomosynthesis was likely to be more beneficial for evaluation of the patient’s medical condition than any available standard therapy. Breast tomosynthesis is U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved as an adjuvant method of screening along with traditional mammography. In the screening setting, tomosynthesis helps to decrease recall rates by delineating true lesions from spurious lesions caused by overlapping structures seen on routine mammography.
Experimental/Investigational · 2016 · IMR EI16-21945
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested reimbursement for bone density study. According researchers guidelines, bone density screening is recommended for postmenopausal women under age 65 with one risk factor. The detection of subclinical vertebral fractures using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) vertebral fracture assessment is well established across current medical literature as results may alter clinical management. Recommendations for postmenopausal women over age 50 may include fracture, height loss, or glucocorticoid treatment. Other criteria include osteopenia and two or more of the following: being aged 60 to 69 years old, self-reported nonvertebral fractures, height loss, and chronic diseases associated with an increased risk of vertebral fractures.
Experimental/Investigational · 2024 · IMR EI24-41260

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
A 41-year-old female enrollee has requested CPT codes, 99215, 36415, 76977, 82270 X 3, 82365, 82397 x 122, 99000, 99001, 93720, 93922 x 2, 94010 x 2, A4649 x 4, A4556NU, A4617NU X 2, A4927NU, 99214, and 82365, for evaluation of her medical condition. Findings: The physician reviewer found that with regard to CPT code 76977 (bone mass screening by ultrasound), this study was not medically necessary in a patient of this patient’s age without a history of hyperparathyroidism. In addition, there were no clinical indications for CPT code 82365 (infrared spectroscopy) based on the documentation provided. CPT code 82397 (chemoluminescence), is not within the standard of care in this particular setting and thus was not medically necessary. CPT code 93720 (body plethysmography) is indicated for patients who have air spaces within the lung that do not communicate with the bronchial tree.
Medical Necessity · 2010 · IMR MN10-11302
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary:An enrollee has requested reimbursement for peripheral bone density testing for possible osteoporosis. Findings: The physician reviewer found that There is a lack of support for the superior efficacy of the services at issue in this clinical setting. While the heel bone density screening test may be good at predicting fracture risk and is a reasonable test when trying to assess the patient’s risk factors for low bone mineral density (BMD), this test is not likely to be more beneficial than the available standard methods of assessing BMD risk. The medical literature show evidence that dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA, DEXA) scan of the hip yields better results when assessing for future risk fracture.
Experimental/Investigational · 2018 · IMR EI18-27523

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 treatment generally, not any individual case.

How to use this in your appeal

These are outcomes from California’s external review program — an independent physician panel that binds the insurer. Every state has an equivalent process, and internal appeals succeed even more often. Cite the outcome record for Bone Density Scanwhen you appeal: reviewers routinely find that denials like yours didn’t hold up.

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.

Denied Bone Density Scan? 36.8% got it reversed.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39