Annals of vascular surgery · 2024
American Insurance Coverage of Endovenous Ablation for Greater and Lesser Saphenous Varicose Veins.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Onyima Chinenye, Hricz Nicholas, Zhu Kevin, Zama Roland, Obizoba Ijeoma, Ha Michael, Schlidt Kevin, Ulloa Kristian, Rasko Yvonne M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Severe cases of varicose veins can cause psychological distress as well as physical symptoms including skin discoloration, wounds, and burning sensations. One intervention, endovenous laser/radiofrequency ablation, is variably covered by insurance. Insurance coverage for this procedure was assessed for all indications of endovenous laser/radiofrequency ablation as medically necessity criteria.
METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of 57 insurance policies for endovenous laser/radiofrequency ablation. The insurance companies were selected based on the greatest state enrollment and market share. A web-based search and telephone interviews were utilized to identify the policies. Medically necessary criteria were then extracted from the publicly available policies.
RESULTS: Fifty-seven (57) insurance policies were assessed, with 36 (63.2%) of these policies providing coverage for endovenous radiofrequency or laser ablation. Six indications existed for coverage, with the most common indication being the demonstration of valvular reflux (n = 29, 80.6%). Of the 29 companies that indicated coverage for valvular reflux, 19 (52.8%) specifically required saphenous reflux. Significantly more companies required saphenous reflux versus other specified types of valvular reflux (52.8% vs 8.3%, P < 0.001 for saphenous vs junctional reflux and 52.8% vs 16.7%, P < 0.003 for saphenous vs nonspecific). Prior to proceeding with endovenous laser or radiofrequency ablation, up to 33% of insurance companies required a trial of conservative management as medically necessary.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a great discrepancy in insurance policy criteria for coverage of endovenous laser/radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of varicose veins, particularly regarding the requirements for valvular reflux and a trial of conservative therapy.
METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of 57 insurance policies for endovenous laser/radiofrequency ablation. The insurance companies were selected based on the greatest state enrollment and market share. A web-based search and telephone interviews were utilized to identify the policies. Medically necessary criteria were then extracted from the publicly available policies.
RESULTS: Fifty-seven (57) insurance policies were assessed, with 36 (63.2%) of these policies providing coverage for endovenous radiofrequency or laser ablation. Six indications existed for coverage, with the most common indication being the demonstration of valvular reflux (n = 29, 80.6%). Of the 29 companies that indicated coverage for valvular reflux, 19 (52.8%) specifically required saphenous reflux. Significantly more companies required saphenous reflux versus other specified types of valvular reflux (52.8% vs 8.3%, P < 0.001 for saphenous vs junctional reflux and 52.8% vs 16.7%, P < 0.003 for saphenous vs nonspecific). Prior to proceeding with endovenous laser or radiofrequency ablation, up to 33% of insurance companies required a trial of conservative management as medically necessary.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a great discrepancy in insurance policy criteria for coverage of endovenous laser/radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of varicose veins, particularly regarding the requirements for valvular reflux and a trial of conservative therapy.