Why Are Patient Appeals More Common Than Expected?

Why Are Patient Appeals More Common Than Expected?

As required by their Statement of Work, Livanta, the Beneficiary and Family Centered Care-Quality Improvement Organization (BFCC-QIO) for regions 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9, published their annual report for the 2022 calendar year (CY). As a reminder, the BFCC-QIO is charged by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) with “improving healthcare services and protecting beneficiaries through efficient statutory review functions, including quality-of-care reviews for Medicare beneficiaries.”

As recently discussed in other RACmonitor articles, Livanta also performs other duties for CMS, including short-stay inpatient admission reviews and high-weighted DRG reviews, but those tasks are not included in this report.

The first message from Livanta’s report is that patient appeals are much more common than one might expect. They note that they handled over 200,000 hospital discharge and post-acute service termination appeals in 2022 as one of two BFCC-QIOs. If Kepro receives a similar number, that means over 1,000 Medicare beneficiaries file an appeal every single day, encompassing hospitals, skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), home health agencies, hospices, and comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation facilities.

Looking closer at the data, a few findings stand out.

First, it appears that the pre-admission Hospital Issued Notice of Non-Coverage, the HINN 1, is used very infrequently. Patients are encouraged to appeal when given the HINN 1, yet Livanta received only 208 appeals in 2022, with nearly 80 percent coming from Region 2, consisting of New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Of those 208 HINN 1 appeals, Livanta agreed with the provider almost 84 percent of the time.

The HINN 10, the notice used when the hospital utilization staff determines that ongoing inpatient care is not necessary, but the physician will not discharge the patient (so they asked Livanta to make the decision) was also uncommon, occurring 111 times, with Livanta siding with the hospital over 78 percent of the time.

On the other end of the appeal spectrum lies the bulk of the work done by Livanta.

Although the percentage varies by region, about 62 percent of the appeals were filed by Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries over the discontinuation of their care at a SNF, the coverage of home care services, or coverage of care at a comprehensive rehabilitation facility (CORF). These are also known as Grijalva appeals, named after the lawsuit that led to the requirement that a process be developed to give these patients appeal rights. Unfortunately, Livanta does not break down the statistics, but one can speculate that the majority of the appeals would be of SNF and home care services.

Looking at Region 5, which encompasses Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio, as an example, there were 52,834 appeals of termination of home care, SNF, or CORF care by Medicare Advantage patients, but only 9,457 appeals of termination of the same services by patients with traditional Medicare. This likely reflects the tight oversight that MA plans have when their enrollees are admitted to a SNF to determine coverage on a nearly daily basis, compared to traditional Medicare, wherein the facility makes its own determination of when the Part A stay is no longer necessary.

Back to hospital appeals – the number of patients who appealed their discharge, as described in the Important Message from Medicare (IMM) presented to every inpatient, was similar across Medicare and Medicare Advantage patients, with a total of 40,146 appeals filed. For these appeals, Livanta agreed with the facility on the discharge 86.8 percent of the time. Interestingly, patients in Region 7, encompassing Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska, seemed drastically less likely to appeal their discharge, although this may be simply due to their drastically smaller population, compared to other regions.

Livanta also addresses quality-of-care concerns submitted by Medicare beneficiaries. While they provide ample data, little of it is directly actionable, as it is too non-specific. What is clear is that in every region, the most common concern was “apparently did not establish and/or develop an appropriate treatment plan for a defined problem or diagnosis (that) prompted this episode of care (excludes laboratory and/or imaging, procedures and consultations).” Of the many quality-of-care concerns, overall, in less than 13 percent of the appeals was the concern confirmed by the Livanta reviewer. 

How does Livanta establish what the appropriate quality of care is? In every diagnostic category for which they provide data, they use UpToDate as their reference. Livanta justifies the use of UpToDate by noting that it “is a comprehensive resource consisting of peer-reviewed, physician-authored articles on thousands of clinical topics. Its review articles are continuously updated by incorporating new evidence from hundreds of medical journals, and cited evidence is graded on its strength and quality. Unlike similar repositories that are designed to be used quickly at the point of care, UpToDate articles generally include more thorough explanations of both the foundations and nuances of their topics.”

As with most statistical reports, the interpretation of data is often influenced by the perspective of the person reviewing it. In this case, it appears first that Livanta does not simply sit around and collect money from a lucrative CMS contract. They clearly work hard for their money. It also seems that for the most part, providers are doing right by patients, winning most appeals.

But perhaps the message should be that while providers are generally making the right decisions about care, perhaps a better job needs to be done communicating with patients about their medical benefits and their medical care.

I am sure every provider would love to provide, and every patient would love to receive, unlimited care to every patient at no cost to anyone, but that is not the reality of our healthcare system. We must work with within the system we have.

If you are interested to see the statistics for your region and state, you can find the reports at https://livantaqio.com/en/About/Annual_Report.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, ACPA-C, CHCQM, CHRI

Ronald Hirsch, MD, is vice president of the Regulations and Education Group at R1 Physician Advisory Services. Dr. Hirsch’s career in medicine includes many clinical leadership roles at healthcare organizations ranging from acute-care hospitals and home health agencies to long-term care facilities and group medical practices. In addition to serving as a medical director of case management and medical necessity reviewer throughout his career, Dr. Hirsch has delivered numerous peer lectures on case management best practices and is a published author on the topic. He is a member of the Advisory Board of the American College of Physician Advisors, and the National Association of Healthcare Revenue Integrity, a member of the American Case Management Association, and a Fellow of the American College of Physicians. Dr. Hirsch is a member of the RACmonitor editorial board and is regular panelist on Monitor Mondays. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views, policies, or opinions of R1 RCM, Inc. or R1 Physician Advisory Services (R1 PAS).

Related Stories

The Conduent Breach: A Stewardship Failure at Scale

The Conduent Breach: A Stewardship Failure at Scale

EDITOR’S NOTE: The author of this article used AI-assisted tools in its composition, but all content, analysis, and conclusions were based on the author’s professional

Read More

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

Sepsis Sequencing in Focus: From Documentation to Defensible Coding

Sepsis sequencing continues to challenge even experienced coding and CDI professionals, with evolving guidelines, documentation gaps, and payer scrutiny driving denials and data inconsistencies. In this webcast, Payal Sinha, MBA, RHIA, CCDS, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, CCDS-O, CRC, CRCR, provides clear guideline-based strategies to accurately code sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock, assign POA indicators, clarify the relationship between infection and organ dysfunction, and align documentation across teams. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen audit defensibility, improve first-pass accuracy, support appeal success, reduce denials, and ensure accurate quality reporting, empowering organizations to achieve consistent, compliant sepsis coding outcomes.

March 26, 2026
I022426_SQUARE

Fracture Care Coding: Reduce Denials Through Accurate Coding, Sequencing, and Modifier Use

Expert presenters Kathy Pride, RHIT, CPC, CCS-P, CPMA, and Brandi Russell, RHIA, CCS, COC, CPMA, break down complex fracture care coding rules, walk through correct modifier application (-25, -57, 54, 55), and clarify sequencing for initial and subsequent encounters. Attendees will gain the practical knowledge needed to submit clean claims, ensure compliance, and stay one step ahead of payer audits in 2026.

February 24, 2026
Mastering Principal Diagnosis: Coding Precision, Medical Necessity, and Quality Impact

Mastering Principal Diagnosis: Coding Precision, Medical Necessity, and Quality Impact

Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.

December 3, 2025

Proactive Denial Management: Data-Driven Strategies to Prevent Revenue Loss

Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.

November 25, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

Mastering MDM for Accurate Professional Fee Coding

In this timely session, Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS-P, CPEDC, COPC, breaks down the complexities of Medical Decision Making (MDM) documentation so providers can confidently capture the true complexity of their care. Attendees will learn practical, efficient strategies to ensure documentation aligns with current E/M guidelines, supports accurate coding, and reduces audit risk, all without adding to charting time.

March 31, 2026

The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips

Join Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, CHCQM for The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips, a practical webcast that demystifies the PEPPER and shows you how to turn complex claims data into actionable insights. Dr. Hirsch will explain how to interpret key measures, identify compliance risks, uncover missed revenue opportunities, and understand new updates in the PEPPER, all to help your organization stay ahead of audits and use this powerful data proactively.

March 19, 2026

Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue

Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.

January 29, 2026

AI in Claims Auditing: Turning Compliance Risks into Defensible Systems

As AI reshapes healthcare compliance, the risk of biased outputs and opaque decision-making grows. This webcast, led by Frank Cohen, delivers a practical Four-Pillar Governance Framework—Transparency, Accountability, Fairness, and Explainability—to help you govern AI-driven claim auditing with confidence. Learn how to identify and mitigate bias, implement robust human oversight, and document defensible AI review processes that regulators and auditors will accept. Discover concrete remedies, from rotation protocols to uncertainty scoring, and actionable steps to evaluate vendors before contracts are signed. In a regulatory landscape that moves faster than ever, gain the tools to stay compliant, defend your processes, and reduce liability while maintaining operational effectiveness.

January 13, 2026

Trending News

Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24