A Critical Examination of Independent Medical Review Decision-making for Cardiovascular Procedures Shows Low Rate of Evidence Citation in Reviews

Abstract

Background: The California Independent Medical Review (IMR) program was created in 2001 to provide an independent, external evaluation of insurers’ denials of coverage of health services. Objective: We sought to evaluate the quality and comprehensiveness of data used to support IMR decision-making between 2015 and 2020. Results: Of the 159 cases submitted to IMR regarding denials of cardiovascular procedures, 52% of these denials were overturned by IMR, thus restoring coverage. Despite a state-wide requirement that specific references to medical and scientific evidence should be provided in IMR reviews, fewer than a quarter of reviews cited any evidence to support decision-making. Slightly more than one third of IMR review decisions were inconsistent with recommendations from professional societies and peer-reviewed evidence; the primary reason for these inconsistencies was that invasive interventions were often recommended by reviewers before utilizing guideline-directed medical or less invasive therapies. Conclusion: Our findings highlight an opportunity for improvement in the quality of IMR decision-making through a more consistent use of available scientific evidence to guide clinical reasoning.