[Discussion] formulary is doing more work than we give it credit for
formulary is doing more work than we give it credit for. Change my mind, genuinely — I have no stake in being right about this.
External review, which is the most underused mechanism discussed on this board.
Internal appeals are decided by the plan. External review sends the determination to an independent body. Where it applies its decision binds the plan, and the deadlines to request it are short and strictly enforced.
The two things that trip people up: not knowing it exists, and exhausting the internal levels so slowly that the external window closes. Ask on the first denial what the external route is and what the deadline will be. Availability and rules vary by jurisdiction and plan type, so say where you are when you ask here.
Documented eighteen months of what had been tried in a one-page table. That table was the appeal.
The process that has actually worked for people on this board, in order.
Get the denial in writing and find the criterion it names. Request the clinical policy bulletin by its number. Write the appeal against that document, criterion by criterion, attaching what has been tried and for how long. Note the deadline from the letter date and diarise it.
If the first level fails, go to the second. If the second fails, ask about external review, which is independent and, where it applies, binding. Keep every date, department and reference number as you go.
It is administrative rather than rhetorical, and the people who win are the ones who treat it that way.
That is everything I have. The rest is opinion and I have tried to keep it out.
best — the order this archive was captured in
step therapy is a documentation problem, not an argument
Have you asked for the clinical policy bulletin by number?
A denial letter is required to state a reason and to reference the criterion applied. That reference is the handle: request the clinical policy document by its identifier and answer it point by point.
[removed by moderator]
Agreed on the plan-year point. Criteria that applied last year may simply not apply now.
What has been documented as tried, and for how long?
the formulary is published, read it before you appeal
Peer-to-peer took fifteen minutes and resolved something a written appeal had been sitting on for a month.
Is this a prior authorisation denial or a formulary exclusion?
Is this a prior authorisation denial or a formulary exclusion?
janoshik_junkie is right that this is documentation rather than persuasion. It took me a year to accept that.
employer plans and individual plans are different fights
Internal appeals are decided by the plan. External review is decided by an independent body and, where it applies, its determination is binding. They are separate mechanisms and the second is chronically underused.
prior authorisation criteria change every plan year
the denial letter names the criterion, start there
Prior authorisation criteria are republished each plan year. A criterion that blocked you in one year may not exist in the next, so a denial is worth retesting after the turnover.
Careful — the deadline runs from the date on the letter. Waiting for a call back can cost you the appeal entirely.
External review was the thing that finally worked. I did not know it existed until a thread on this board.
a template letter that quotes their own criteria back is the strongest one
Spent six weeks arguing in general terms and got nowhere. Two paragraphs quoting their own criteria turned it around in eleven days.
ask for the denial reason in writing, always
- 1step therapy is a documentation problem, not an argument11 comments in this branch · started by u/plain_titration
- 2Internal appeals are decided by the plan. External review is decided by an…9 comments in this branch · started by u/hassan_chowdhury