Home / Treatments / Chiropractic Manipulation

Chiropractic Manipulation denials: what the review data shows

Independent reviewers have decided 20 published cases where an insurer denied Chiropractic Manipulation — and they overturned the insurer 30% of the time. A denial for Chiropractic Manipulation is a starting position, not a final answer.

Published decisions
20
2001–2026
Overturned
30%
6 denials reversed
Typical time to a decision
21 days
Most land between 17 and 28 days
Handled as urgent
10%
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: The patient requested reimbursement for chiropractic services.According to Researches, scheduled interval ongoing management for secondary and tertiary prevention is recommended. The guidelines indicate continued chiropractic treatments when the patient demonstrates clinical improvements and should be discharged from active care with self-care instruction once the patient is stable. In this case, a review of the records confirmed that the patient underwent chiropractic manipulation involving three to four regions, which included the thoracic spine and cervical spine. The record reveals that there were no symptoms reported in the cervical and thoracic regions, and no physical examination in the cervical and thoracic regions took place.
Medical Necessity · 2024 · IMR MN24-41542
A 41-year-old female enrollee has requested chiropractic treatment and/or physical therapy services for treatment of her rotator cuff syndrome and cervicalgia. Findings: The physician reviewer found that this patient suffers from symptoms of right shoulder pain secondary to bicipital tendonitis and rotator cuff impingement which have previously benefited from physical therapy treatment. Non-surgical treatment, based on the imaging results is appropriate for this patient’s condition at this time. This patient has a need for therapy which increases her shoulder range of motion and decreases her pain. As noted in an article by Camarinos and Marinko, manual physical therapy has been shown to be effective for painful shoulder conditions. Given the patient’s previous response to physical therapy, she is likely to benefit from a repeat course of therapy at this time.
Medical Necessity · 2010 · IMR MN10-10929

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
A 39-year-old male enrollee has requested reimbursement for chiropractic services. The Health Plan has denied this request indicating the services at issue were not required on an urgent or emergent basis. Findings: The physician reviewer found that the patient was in a parked minivan which was struck by another vehicle. His body was not directly struck by that vehicle, but he did sustain injuries related to the rapid body movements caused by the impact. He had no focal head injury or loss of consciousness. He did not seek medical attention on the day of the collision for reasons related to his wife’s injuries and the need to care for his children, but he saw a chiropractor the next day with complaints of pain in his head, neck, upper and lower back, pelvis, and left elbow with numbness in his right hand. His pain was generally in the 7 out of 10 range.
Urgent Care · 2012 · IMR UR12-13837
A 36-year-old female enrollee has requested coverage for chiropractic/physical therapy treatments beyond the 38 treatments authorized and prospective coverage for continued chiropractic/physical therapy treatment (20 sessions). The Health Plan has denied this request indicating that the services at issue were not and are not medically necessary for treatment of the enrollee’s moderate to severe right upper back and bilateral lower neck pain. Findings: The physician reviewer found that the patient has undergone extensive therapies since her 2009 injury, including various passive palliative interventions for pain relief. No significant, sustained benefit would be anticipated with further passive treatment such as chiropractic manipulation at this time.
Medical Necessity · 2011 · IMR MN11-13131

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 Chiropractic Manipulationwhen 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 Chiropractic Manipulation? 30% got it reversed.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39