Switch back to WCC classic look
WCC's Collection of COVID-19 information

WorkCompCentral – Workers' Compensation Education, Courses, News and Information

Register for a 7-day trial!
Call or email us anytime
(805) 484-0333
Search Guide
Today is Monday, May 25, 2020 -

News Articles

Tuesday, August 27, 2019

Maximus Says Scrap UR, Go Straight to IMR for Disputed Drug Denials

  • By Elaine Goodman
  • National
  • Topic: Top
  • -  2217 views
  • - Average time spent on item: 77 minutes
  • - Popular with: Legal
  • -  3 shares
The development of a model law for states seeking to adopt a workers’ comp drug formulary has …

Purchase this story for only $7.99!

Add to Cart

For access to all our articles, check out our subscription options.

4 Comments (2 Replies)

Log in to post a comment

Close


Do not post libelous remarks. You are solely responsible for the postings you input. By posting here you agree to hold harmless and indemnify WorkCompCentral for any damages and actions your post may cause.
John Don Aug 27, 2019 a 10:08 am PDT

What a great idea! This way we can have 90% denial rate from the get go & the workers can all go on MEDI-CAL.

Randy Bugg Aug 27, 2019 a 10:08 am PDT

I see some potential issues in regard to CA. Adjusters cannot "deny" medications or any medical treatment for that matter. Only the UR process may non-certify. So, in order for their to be a "denial" of medications to go "straight to IMR" one would be obliged to do so via UR in our great state due to the current statutory framework.

Also, if the UR process was working within the ideal context of the current statutes (and we all know it often does not) that process would afford a peer to peer telephone conversation to discuss the medications and its use, prior to any non-certification. Since IMR does not allow for any communication with the reviewer, the concept of IMR as the only avenue of appealing would not be very attractive if I were an injured worker

Randy Bugg Aug 27, 2019 a 10:08 am PDT

Apologies for incorrect use of "their". I was typing quickly...

Beth Harville Sep 5, 2019 a 3:09 pm PDT

That was my take also -- the adjusters can't say no; a request needs to go to UR in order for that to happen. If that was changed so UR was side-stepped on prescriptions and everything went to Maximus instead, they would be able to charge the IMR fee for every RFA that wasn't obviously approved within the formulary. This mostly sounds like a way for Maximus to generate more income.

Dr Aug 27, 2019 a 2:08 pm PDT

The letter from Maximus to NCOIL recommends that the "right to appeal the independent review organization's decision should be limited." This limited right would be "in the interest of finality."Yessir, it looks like independent review has discovered still another way to shortchange injured workers.

An appeal "might be allowed if it's found that the reviewer had a conflict of interest, a hurdle purposefully made too high even for the most reasonable of appeals especially if the IMR doctor is allowed to remain "anonymous."

Robert L. Weinmann, MD, editor. www.politicsofhealthcare.com

Gary Nelson Aug 28, 2019 a 9:08 am PDT

Da Comrade! The Party continues to make life better for the proletarian masses.

Today’s News

Advertisements

Advertise with us
Did you know you could enjoy HUGE savings by bundling all of your favorite WCC services? Click here.
Our Accounts Representatives are available to help. Give us a call at 866-975-2667
120 hours of state-required training to become a licensed Claims Adjuster in California.

Now Trending

Featured Video

Featured Courses

Workers' Compensation Education

more

Jobs

Upcoming Events

Workers' Compensation Events

more

Social Media Links


WorkCompCentral Workers' Compensation
News and Education
4081 Mission Oaks Blvd
Camarillo, CA 93012
(805) 484-0333