GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Archived. This submission is more than a year old. Votes and new comments are closed, and some of the advice in it may have been superseded — check the community wiki for the current version.
2.1k
c/insurancefights·posted 2 years ago by u/ismael_nwosu

[Question] how do you actually verify formulary

Question Clean Column ×2 Slow Clap ×1

Genuine question, and the title is the question: how do you actually verify formulary.

Documented eighteen months of what had been tried in a one-page table. That table was the appeal.

External review was the thing that finally worked. I did not know it existed until a thread on this board.

New plan year, entirely new criteria, and the denial that had been immovable in the autumn simply did not apply in January.

Would rather be corrected in public than confident in private.

2,805 up / 687 down80% upvoted61 commentsid fb4ti31 Dec 2023

61 comments

25 in this archive, depth 5

best — the order this archive was captured in

u/appeal_letter_alMOD311 points·2 years ago

Staff name removed. Departments and criteria can be named here; individuals cannot.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ismael_nwosuOP164 points·2 years ago·edited

Missed a deadline because I counted from when I opened the envelope. That mistake cost me an entire cycle.

replysharereportpermalink
u/step_therapy_s193 points·2 years ago·edited

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.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ismael_nwosuOP99 points·2 years ago·edited

the diagnosis code on the claim is doing more work than anything you write

replysharereportpermalink
u/maren_sorensen27 points·2 years ago

the formulary is published, read it before you appeal

replysharereportpermalink
u/adaeze_weiss101 points·2 years ago

Same view. The second-level appeal is where mine turned, after a first-level denial that looked final.

replysharereportpermalink
u/runa_wikstrom81 points·2 years ago

That criterion is from the previous plan year. The current bulletin has different wording.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ismael_nwosuOP45 points·2 years ago

What has been documented as tried, and for how long?

replysharereportpermalink
u/purity_pedantanalytical62 points·2 years ago

the denial letter names the criterion, start there

replysharereportpermalink
u/wholesome_lurker0 points·2 years ago

Not convinced. That is a formulary exclusion rather than a prior authorisation denial, and the route to challenge it is different.

replysharereportpermalink
u/sock_puppet_spotter0 points·2 years ago

Disagree with the tone strategy. Anger has never moved a determination; matching the criterion has.

replysharereportpermalink
[deleted]1 point·2 years ago

[deleted]

replysharereportpermalink
u/greta_chukwu31 points·2 years ago

Spent six weeks arguing in general terms and got nowhere. Two paragraphs quoting their own criteria turned it around in eleven days.

replysharereportpermalink
u/plain_titration26 points·2 years ago

Spent six weeks arguing in general terms and got nowhere.

Adding the underused one — external review. Independent, binding where it applies, and hardly anybody gets that far.

replysharereportpermalink
u/hassan_chowdhury26 points·2 years ago

prior authorisation criteria change every plan year

replysharereportpermalink
u/line_bergstrom7 points·2 years ago

This. Step therapy is a paperwork requirement and it is beaten with documentation, not persuasion.

replysharereportpermalink
u/canada_coverage19 points·2 years ago

That advice is jurisdiction-specific and this board spans several. Say where you are.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ahmed_abubakar8 points·2 years ago

What is the appeal deadline on the letter?

replysharereportpermalink
u/slow_logbook_notes2 points·2 years ago

a peer-to-peer call is often faster than a written appeal

replysharereportpermalink
u/cato_achebe0 points·2 years ago

Small fix — external review is independent of the plan. The second-level internal appeal is not.

replysharereportpermalink
u/formulary_fighterappeals1 point·2 years ago

Right, and keeping every date and reference number turns a frustrating process into an auditable one.

replysharereportpermalink
u/whois_wanda5 points·2 years ago

Cosigning on external review. It is a real mechanism, it is underused, and the deadlines are strict.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ferritin_low15 points·2 years ago

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.

replysharereportpermalink
u/whois_wanda7 points·2 years ago

ask for the denial reason in writing, always

replysharereportpermalink
u/hassan_castellanos4 points·2 years ago

the second-level appeal is where things actually turn

replysharereportpermalink
Permalinked branches
Deep branches get their own page so a single reply chain can be linked and read on its own.
About c/insurancefights

The paperwork war. Prior-authorisation criteria, denial reason codes, step-therapy documentation, external review, employer carve-outs, and the appeal letter templates the community has iterated on for three years. Mostly US-shaped but the tactics generalise.

46kmembers
95submissions
Dec 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
c/insurancefights rules
  1. Say which country and which plan type. "Insurance" means eleven different things.
  2. Redact member ids and group numbers from every screenshot.
  3. Do not suggest misrepresenting a diagnosis. That is fraud and it gets you banned.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Moderators
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.