Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Prior authorization requirements in the office-based laboratory setting are administratively inefficient and threaten timeliness of care

2023; Elsevier BV; Volume: 79; Issue: 5 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1016/j.jvs.2023.10.066

1097-6809

Keerthi Harish, Ethan Chervonski, Giancarlo Speranza, Thomas S. Maldonado, Karan Garg, Mikel Sadek, Caron Rockman, Glenn R. Jacobowitz, Todd Berland,

Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control

Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the administrative and clinical impacts of prior authorization (PA) processes in the office-based laboratory (OBL) setting. Methods This single-institution, retrospective analysis studied all OBL PAs pursued between January 2018 and March 2022. Case, PA, and coding information was obtained from the practice's scheduling database. Results Over the study period, 1854 OBL cases were scheduled; 8% (n = 146) required PA. Of these, 75% (n = 110) were for lower extremity arterial interventions, 19% (n = 27) were for deep venous interventions, and 6% (n = 9) were for other interventions. Of 146 PAs, 19% (n = 27) were initially denied but 74.1% (n = 7) of these were overturned on appeal. Deep venous procedures were initially denied, at 43.8% (n = 14), more often than were arterial procedures, at 11.8% (n = 13). Of 146 requested procedures, 4% (n = 6) were delayed due to pending PA determination by a mean 14.2 ± 18.3 working days. An additional 6% (n = 8) of procedures were performed in the interest of time before final determination. Of the seven terminally denied procedures, 57% (n = 4) were performed at cost to the practice based on clinical judgment. Conclusions Using PA appeals mechanisms, while administratively onerous, resulted in the overturning of most initial denials.