Septoplasty denials: 61.1% overturned by independent reviewers
In 36 California IMR decisions from 2001 to 2024, reviewers overturned the plan 22 times (61.1%). In the last five years: 80.0% of 5. Denials reach IMR only when a member appeals all the way; read the caveats below before generalising.
By diagnosis
| Diagnosis category | Decisions | Overturned | Last 5 years |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ears/Nose/Throat | 28 | 64.3% | 80.0% of 5 |
| Respiratory System | 8 | 50.0% | — |
By year (last five)
| Year | Decisions | Overturned |
|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 1 | 0.0% |
| 2022 | 2 | 100.0% |
| 2023 | 1 | 100.0% |
| 2024 | 1 | 100.0% |
What the findings mention
| What the findings mention | Decisions | Overturned | All decisions here |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published evidence citedThe findings refer to peer-reviewed or published evidence. | 6 | 83.3% | 61.1% |
| Records did not supportThe findings say the documentation did not show what was needed (usually an upheld denial). | 6 | 0.0% | 61.1% |
| Prior therapies failedThe findings mention treatments that were tried without adequate response. | 4 | 75.0% | 61.1% |
Keyword matches on the reviewer’s findings, not causes. A tag that appears mostly in overturned decisions is worth documenting in an appeal; it is not a guarantee.
From recent overturned decisions
“The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested reimbursement for the septoplasty. Nasal obstruction can be the result of medical conditions such as rhinitis and rhinosinusitis, as well as fixed anatomic obstructions such as deviations of the nasal septum. Medical therapy is typically the first line of treatment, employing topical nasal medications such as …”
“The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for sinus surgery for the placement of bilateral Latera absorbable nasal implants. Nasal obstruction is a result of insufficient airflow through the nose, which is a notable symptom in this patient’s clinical setting. A review of current practices indicate there are both surgical …”
“Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for repair of nasal vestibular stenosis, with the approved septoplasty or submucous resection, with or without cartilage scoring, contouring or replacement with graft, and/or bilateral submucous resection of inferior turbinate, partial or complete. Based on available clinical documentation, the requested nasal vestibular stenosis repair, septoplasty, and turbinate reduction …”
- California only: these are decisions by independent reviewers under California's IMR program (plans regulated by the Department of Managed Health Care). Other states and self-funded employer plans use different reviewers and rules.
- Selection: only denials that a member took all the way to IMR appear. Most denials are never appealed, and the ones that reach an external reviewer are not a random sample.
- Overturned means the reviewer disagreed with the plan; it does not mean the treatment worked or that a similar request will be approved.
- Argument tags are keyword matches on the reviewer's findings. They describe what the findings mention, not why the case was decided.
- Categories are DMHC's own labels (treatment sub-category and diagnosis category); 'Other' is a catch-all and is excluded from rankings.
Source: California Department of Managed Health Care, Independent Medical Review (IMR) Determinations, Trend (CHHS Open Data). Public California government data; Apellica's aggregates and tags are CC BY 4.0.
Questions
How often were Septoplasty denials overturned?
In 36 California IMR decisions from 2001 to 2024, reviewers overturned the plan 22 times (61.1%). In the last five years: 80.0% of 5.
What did the reviewers' findings mention in overturned cases?
The table on this page counts keyword matches in the findings: prior therapies tried, contraindications, guidelines cited, published evidence, whether the records supported the request. They describe what the findings say, not why the case was decided.
Does a California IMR result apply to my plan?
Only California plans regulated by the Department of Managed Health Care go to IMR. Other states and self-funded employer plans use different reviewers, but the reasoning is the same kind: criteria, documentation and alternatives. Use the findings as a guide to what to document.
Related: California appeal rights · California external-review reversal rate · The levers library · CSV
Independent reviewers reverse plans when the record answers the criteria. Upload the denial letter; a senior reviewer reads it within 24 hours and tells you in writing whether it can be appealed and how. $0 upfront, 10% of what is recovered, nothing if we do not recover. Not a law firm.