An Analysis of Inpatient Rehabilitation Approval Among Private Insurance Carriers at a Cancer Center

Abstract

BackgroundAcute inpatient rehabilitation is often used by cancer patients to assist with discharge home and/or preparation for further treatment. Private insurance patients often require approval before transfer to acute inpatient rehabilitation. ObjectiveTo analyze the approval rate of private insurance carriers for acute inpatient cancer rehabilitation. DesignRetrospective analysis. SettingTertiary referral-based cancer center. PatientsA total of 96 consecutive patients with private insurance who had acute inpatient rehabilitation authorization requests made between April 1, 2014, and September 17, 2014. InterventionPatient cases were assessed by a physiatrist, deemed clinically appropriate for acute inpatient rehabilitation, and submitted to private insurance payers for an approval request. ResultsIn all, 84 of 96 requests (87%) for private insurance authorization for inpatient rehabilitation transfer were approved. Of the 96 cases, 14 cases (14.6%) were initially denied. Nine of 96 (9.4%) progressed to a peer-to-peer appeal, of which only 2 of 9 (11.1%) resulted in approval for inpatient rehabilitation transfer (P = .222). The insurance carriers represented were designated as insurance A (46 patients, 48%), insurance B (18 patients, 19%), insurance C (12 patients, 13%), and other insurances (20, 21%). Two of 46 insurance A requests were initially denied, as compared to 7 of 18 for insurance B, 0 of 12 for insurance C, and 4 of 20 for other insurances (P = .001). Patients with insurance B (P = .002, odds ratio = 14) and other insurances (P = .062, odds ratio = 5.50) were more likely to be denied inpatient rehabilitation approval compared to patients with insurance A. No significant difference between mean Functional Independence Measure scores for approved and denied patients were found for transfers (P = .239) and mobility (P = .129), respectively. ConclusionAccess to acute inpatient rehabilitation is unfortunately limited by insurers rather than clinical indicators. Future multicenter studies and universally accepted guidelines regarding inpatient rehabilitation criteria are needed.