The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2022
Third-party Compliance With State-Mandated Orthodontic Coverage for Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Care in California: An Insurance Claim Thematic Analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Azizollahi Ronnel, Hubacek Laura, Oberoi Snehlata, Kearns Cristin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: California Senate Bill 630 (SB630) enacted statutorily mandated health plan coverage for orthodontic care of patients with cleft palate and craniofacial anomalies in 2009, which was effective from July 1, 2010. In this qualitative analysis, third-party compliance with SB630 in a university-based cleft and craniofacial orthodontic program is evaluated.
METHODS: Privately insured patients that experienced a coverage delay or denial of orthodontic treatment for cleft lip and palate in the University of California, San Francisco Cleft and Craniofacial Orthodontic Program between July 1, 2010 and October 28, 2020 were identified. A thematic analysis of reasons for delay or denial was conducted.
RESULTS: Nearly three quarters of patients experienced coverage delay and/or denials. The most common reason given was that services were not covered.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite state-mandated coverage, inappropriate denials of orthodontic care for patients with cleft lip and palate by private insurers persist in California.
METHODS: Privately insured patients that experienced a coverage delay or denial of orthodontic treatment for cleft lip and palate in the University of California, San Francisco Cleft and Craniofacial Orthodontic Program between July 1, 2010 and October 28, 2020 were identified. A thematic analysis of reasons for delay or denial was conducted.
RESULTS: Nearly three quarters of patients experienced coverage delay and/or denials. The most common reason given was that services were not covered.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite state-mandated coverage, inappropriate denials of orthodontic care for patients with cleft lip and palate by private insurers persist in California.