Albana Mohamed F, Chayes Dylan R, Abuattieh Omar M, Radcliff Kris E
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Inspira Health, Vineland, NJ, USA.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Inspira Health, Vineland, NJ, USA
Int J Spine Surg. 2024 Mar 4;18(1):1-8. doi: 10.14444/8521.
Microdiscectomy for patients with chronic lumbar radiculopathy refractory to conservative therapy has significantly better outcomes than continued nonoperative management. The North American Spine Society (NASS) outlined specific criteria to establish medical necessity for elective lumbar microdiscectomy. We hypothesized that insurance providers have substantial variability among one another and from the NASS guidelines.
A cross-sectional analysis of US national and local insurance companies was conducted to assess policies on coverage recommendations for lumbar microdiscectomy. Insurers were selected based on their enrollment data and market share of direct written premiums. The top 4 national insurance providers and the top 3 state-specific providers in New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania were selected. Insurance coverage guidelines were accessed through a web-based search, provider account, or telephone call to the specific provider. If no policy was provided, it was documented as such. Preapproval criteria were entered as categorical variables and consolidated into 4 main categories: symptom criteria, examination criteria, imaging criteria, and conservative treatment.
The 13 selected insurers composed roughly 31% of the market share in the United States and approximately 82%, 62%, and 76% of the market share for New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania, respectively. Insurance descriptions of symptom criteria, imaging criteria, and the definition of conservative treatment had substantial differences as compared with those defined by NASS.
Although a guideline to establish medical necessity was developed by NASS, many insurance companies have created their own guidelines, which have resulted in inconsistent management based on geographic location and selected provider.
Providers must be cognizant of the differing preapproval criteria needed for each in-network insurance company in order to provide effective and efficient care for patients with lumbar radiculopathy.
对于经保守治疗无效的慢性腰椎神经根病患者,显微椎间盘切除术的效果明显优于持续的非手术治疗。北美脊柱协会(NASS)制定了具体标准以确定选择性腰椎显微椎间盘切除术的医疗必要性。我们推测,各保险公司之间以及与NASS指南之间存在很大差异。
对美国国家和地方保险公司进行横断面分析,以评估腰椎显微椎间盘切除术的承保建议政策。根据参保数据和直接承保保费的市场份额选择保险公司。选择了4家全国性顶级保险公司以及新泽西州、纽约州和宾夕法尼亚州的3家州级特定保险公司。通过网络搜索、供应商账户或致电特定供应商获取保险承保指南。如果未提供政策,则记录在案。将预先批准标准作为分类变量输入,并合并为4个主要类别:症状标准、检查标准、影像学标准和保守治疗。
所选的13家保险公司约占美国市场份额的31%,分别约占新泽西州、纽约州和宾夕法尼亚州市场份额的82%、62%和76%。与NASS定义的标准相比,保险公司对症状标准、影像学标准和保守治疗定义的描述存在很大差异。
尽管NASS制定了确定医疗必要性的指南,但许多保险公司制定了自己的指南,这导致基于地理位置和所选供应商的管理不一致。
为了为腰椎神经根病患者提供有效和高效的护理,医疗服务提供者必须了解每个网络内保险公司所需的不同预先批准标准。