"Necessary" holds a clinical context when discussing prior authorization. Recommend replacing with "required". - PAS #180

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Priority: Medium
    • US Da Vinci PAS (FHIR)
    • STU3
    • Financial Mgmt
    • (profiles) [deprecated]
    • Use Cases and Overvi
    • Hide

      Agree – adopt proposed wording

      Show
      Agree – adopt proposed wording
    • Robert Dieterle / Rachael Foerster: 20-0-1
    • Clarification
    • Non-substantive

      Existing Wording: Is Prior Authorization Necessary?

      Proposed Wording: Is Prior Authorization Required?

      Comment:

      The term "necessary" holds a different context when discussing PA, which largely hinges on a determination of medical "necessity". Recommend changing to "required", which more accurately conveys the payer rules

      Summary:

      "Necessary" holds a clinical context when discussing prior authorization. Recommend replacing with "required".

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Terrence Cunningham
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: