FREE TO READ

Everything here is free to read, and nothing here is a claim about your case. Built from California’s published records and modified by us — not official government data. How these numbers were made.

Condition class · category · California

Skin denials at external review

When a California health plan denied care for skin and the enrollee took it to Independent Medical Review, this is what independent physician reviewers decided.

70.1%

Overturned
314 of 448
Era
2021-2025
Jurisdiction
California DMHC IMR
Published class
Skin Disorders
Median days to decision
39
All years
56.0% of 1,342
314 overturned134 upheld

What stands out here

computed from this class
  • the question matters

    The outcome turns on which question was put to the reviewer: 71.3% on medical necessity (n=414) against 54.5% on experimental/investigational (n=33) — a gap of 17 points inside the same condition.

  • rising

    It has risen over the published record: 29.8% in 2004 against 75.5% in 2025. What drove that is not in this data — the file holds outcomes, not who chose to appeal or how plans changed their own review.

  • most-cited standard

    Reviewers named FDA more than any other standard here — 215 decisions, which came out at 86.5%, 16 points above the class as a whole. Citing a standard and the outcome share a cause; this is not the effect of naming it.

  • concentrated

    69% of these disputes involved pharmacy alone (n=310, 84.5% overturned), so the headline figure for skin is largely that pairing.

The trend, with its era

computed
0%25%50%75%100%SB 1410 field mandate75.5%20042010201520202025Share of decisions overturning the health plan · years below n=30 omitted

Hover the chart for a year’s counts. Series stops at 2025 — report year 2026 uses a different category vocabulary.

What reviewers relied on

3 validated codes

California requires each published decision to carry “a detailed case summary that includes the specific standards, criteria, and medical and scientific evidence, if any, that led to the case decision” (Health & Safety Code § 1374.33(h)(1)(K)). These are the elements our extraction found in this class, split by how the decision came out.

What the reviewer relied onIn overturnsIn upholds
the FDA label or approval status60%n=31422%n=134
a standardised level-of-care instrument0%n=3140%n=134
a California statutory definition6%n=31437%n=134

Read as description, not instruction. These are patterns in what reviewers wrote, not steps to follow, and no combination of them predicts an outcome. Only codes that cleared the validation gate appear — thirteen did not.

Authorities named in this class

computed
  • FDA86.5%215
  • American Academy of Dermatology96.7%30
  • American Society of Plastic Surgeons27
  • NCCN7
  • American College of Rheumatology3
  • IDSA2

A rate here is the outcome of decisions that named the authority, not the effect of naming it. Reviewers cite the standard they applied; the citation and the outcome share a cause.

By treatment

computed
  • Overturned — the reviewer did not sustain the denial
  • Upheld — the reviewer sustained the denial
  • Pharmacy84.5%310
  • Reconstructive & plastic procedures22.4%76
  • Diagnostic imaging & screening14
  • Special procedures14
  • Electro, thermal & radiofrequency7
  • Durable medical equipment6
  • Diagnostic & physician evaluation6
  • General surgery5

Browse all treatment classes · Pick your own pair

The specific treatments inside this class

below n=30, no rate is claimed
  • Skin Treatment81.2%197
  • Biologics93.3%89
  • Other34.9%43
  • Panniculectomy24.2%33
  • Hyperbaric O2 Chamb10
  • Abdominoplasty6
  • Anti-inflammatories6
  • Botox Injection6

By review type

computed
  • Medical Necessity71.3%414
  • Experimental/Investigational54.5%33
  • Urgent Care1

Medical-necessity review asks whether the care is needed. Experimental/investigational review asks whether it is likely to be more beneficial than standard therapy — a harder statutory test, and the rates show it.

Every figure on this page is conditional on a denial having reached external review. Fewer than 1% of denials are appealed internally at all, so this describes denials that were fought to the end — not denials in general — and it describes California only. Who this does not cover.

Free help, first: the California DMHC Help Center files your Independent Medical Review at no cost — 1-888-466-2219, dmhc.ca.gov.