An amount in dispute is required
for an adverse determination to be appealable. Although some amount
must be in dispute for a reconsideration, unless specifically waived
(e.g., the appeal involves denial of certification as a TRICARE
authorized provider), there is no established minimum dollar amount.
If the contractor’s reconsideration determination is less than fully
favorable to the appealing party and the remaining amount in dispute
is less than $50, no further appeal rights are available (i.e.,
$50 or more must be in dispute for a reconsideration to be accepted
at the TQMC contractor, or a formal review to be accepted at DHA).
The determination of “amount in dispute” affects the appealing party’s
rights and must be carefully evaluated, including, when appropriate,
multiple claims for the same service and related claims. Under TRICARE
Prime, if the beneficiary has no liability, other than a nominal
per visit copayment, there is no amount in dispute (this does not
preclude a Prime enrollee from appealing a preadmission/preprocedure
denial determination for services that have not been provided).
If the services at issue are not a benefit under TRICARE, and the
provider is a network provider, the
beneficiary
shall be held harmless by the network provider. (Refer to
Chapter 5, Section 1, paragraph 3.5 for information
regarding “hold harmless”.)
4.1 Calculating The Amount In
Dispute
The “amount in dispute” is calculated
as the actual amount the contractor would pay if the services and/or
supplies involved in the dispute were determined to be payable.
4.1.1 Examples
Of Excluded Amounts
Example 1: Amounts in excess of
the TRICARE-determined allowable charge or cost are excluded.
Example 2: The beneficiary’s TRICARE deductible and
cost-share amounts are excluded.
Example 3: Amounts which the TRICARE beneficiary, parent,
guardian, or other responsible person has no legal obligation to
pay are excluded.
Example 4: Amounts under the double
coverage provisions of the TRICARE Reimbursement Manual (TRM),
Chapter 4 are excluded.
4.1.2 Amounts For
Preadmission/Preprocedure Appeals
When the
dispute involves denial of a request for authorization in advance
of actual care or service, the amount in dispute shall be the estimated
allowable charge or cost for the service requested.
4.1.3 Amounts For
Provider Status Appeals
If the dispute involves
the denial of a provider’s request for approval as an authorized TRICARE
provider or the determination to terminate a provider as an authorized
TRICARE provider, there is no requirement for an amount in dispute.
Initial determinations in provider status appeals are considered
factual initial determinations (refer to
Section 5).
4.2 Combining
Claims
Individual claims may be combined
to meet the required amount in dispute for referral of the appeal
to DHA if all of the following exist:
• Claims involve the
same beneficiary (when the EOC involves the services of both network and
non-network providers, only the claims submitted by the non-network
providers will be considered in determining the amount in dispute);
• Claims involve the
same issue; and
• At
least one of the claims, so combined, has had a reconsideration
determination issued by a contractor.
4.3 Related Claims
When the contractor receives an appeal on a
claim which has been denied, the contractor shall retrieve and examine
all claims related to the specific service or supply or EOC received
by the beneficiary to determine if the claim in dispute was properly
denied and if related claims were properly processed. All claims
which relate to the same incident of care or the same type of service
to the beneficiary shall be processed in the same manner and shall
be readjudicated and resolved along with the denied claim in the
same reconsideration determination. If one claim which relates to
an excluded procedure is denied, all claims which relate to the
same procedure shall also be denied. If a procedure is covered and
one claim involving that procedure and EOC is paid, other claims
relating to the same procedure and/or period of care which have
been denied should be examined in conjunction with the paid claim
to see if the other claims may be paid or whether all the claims
should be uniformly denied. The contractor shall take action in
accordance with
paragraph 4.4.2 to determine if any claim
for the services or supplies was improperly paid or denied. All
related claims shall be made part of the appeal file. The file shall
contain full documentation pertaining to the issue and the care
in dispute, to include a record of actions taken by the contractor
on all claims involving the same issue.
Example 1: The contractor receives claims for hospitalization,
testing, physician services, and the purchase of a cerebellar stimulator
implant device for a TRICARE beneficiary. These claims involve the
surgical implant of the cerebellar stimulator in the patient’s skull.
The claims for the hospital care, physician’s services, and the
stimulator device are denied by the contractor on the basis that
the procedure is unproven. The claims for testing are paid. Upon
appeal, the contractor shall retrieve all the claims for the EOC.
The contractor shall find that the charges for the testing were
erroneously paid because they relate to the denied unproven procedure.
The contractor shall take action in accordance with
paragraph 4.4.2.
Example 2: A beneficiary with out-of-control diabetes
is hospitalized, during which time she receives nutrition counseling,
an eye examination and insulin therapy. On the last day of the hospitalization,
an M.D. performs an abortion. The initial determination denies cost-sharing
for all services and the hospital requests a reconsideration. All
services must be reviewed to determine which are related to the
covered hospitalization for diabetes and which are related to the
noncovered abortion.
Example 3: Outpatient psychotherapy sessions are provided
to a beneficiary and cost-shared by the contractor for a period
of twelve months. All claims for the thirteenth month are denied
due to lack of an adequate treatment plan. Upon appeal of the denial
of the claim, all previously paid claims shall be retrieved and
examined to determine whether all the claims should be paid, all
denied, or whether denial is proper for some of the claims.
Example 4: The contractor denies a claim for physical
therapy on the basis that the services were not medically necessary.
At reconsideration, the contractor discovers that previous claims
for the same services and condition were paid in error. Because
the erroneously paid claims involve the same issue - medical necessity
of the physical therapy - the contractor shall add the erroneously
paid claims to the reconsideration and review all claims together.
4.4 Erroneous
Payments
In considering an issue under appeal,
questions may arise concerning previous payment of services or claims
not under appeal. Possible erroneous payments will be reviewed in
depth, including medical review if necessary, to determine if, at
the time the initial determination was made, there existed any basis
for the payment. If the reviewer concludes there was a basis for
payment at the time the claim was processed, the payment may stand.
When the evidence indicates a payment was erroneous and not supported
by law or regulation, the following action will be taken.
4.4.1 Recoupment
Involving Separate Issues
The contractor
may request a refund and treat the recoupment action as an initial determination.
Appeal rights shall be offered to the next level of appeal. Any
new appeal must address itself to the benefit issue in dispute and
not the fact that a refund has been requested.
4.4.2
Recoupment
Involving Issues Under Appeal
When the contractor
examines claims which are related to the claim in dispute and determines
that one or more of the related claims were improperly paid, the
contractor shall explain the erroneous payment in detail and advise
the appealing party of any recoupment. If the contractor determines
recoupment is appropriate, the amount of the erroneously paid claim(s)
will be added to the amount in dispute, and the reconsideration
review will consider both the claim(s) in dispute and the erroneously
paid related claim(s) which involve the same issue. If the total
amount in dispute permits a higher level appeal, the appealing party
will be so advised.