Lead story: CMS expands the DMEPOS prior-authorization list for April 2026
Seven additional HCPCS codes became subject to nationwide prior authorization as a condition of payment, while CMS also introduced an exemption path for qualifying suppliers.
Follow the rules. Understand the workflow. Protect access to care.
Seven additional HCPCS codes became subject to nationwide prior authorization as a condition of payment, while CMS also introduced an exemption path for qualifying suppliers.
CMS-0062-P would bring drug authorizations into a broader interoperability framework while also proposing updated standards and transaction requirements.
The March 31 reporting milestone creates a new, imperfect public evidence layer for examining payer authorization volume, outcomes, and decision timeframes.
CMS-0062-P would bring drug authorizations into a broader interoperability framework while also proposing updated standards and transaction requirements.
The March 31 reporting milestone creates a new, imperfect public evidence layer for examining payer authorization volume, outcomes, and decision timeframes.
CMS now requires MA organizations to submit information about internal coverage criteria used by the organization or its delegates for Part C prior authorization.
The initial Decision Intelligence Ecosystem connects Anterior, Latitude Health, and Case Health AI to GuidingCare, signaling a modular market for clinical review intelligence.
The three Da Vinci implementation guides define connected but distinct stages for discovering requirements, assembling documentation, and exchanging authorization requests and responses.
The provider-side offering combines rules, payer connectivity, automation, EHR completion, and human operations across determination, submission, and follow-up.
Medical-service authorization moves among benefit rules, clinical records, submission channels, payer or delegate review, determinations, reasons, status, and appeals.
Read the market record →Drug authorization relies on pharmacy-benefit participants and NCPDP transaction paths that should not be silently combined with medical-service workflows.
Read the market record →Operational efficiency and clinical appropriateness are separate questions. Buyers need to see who configures policy, where licensed judgment enters, and how reasons and overrides remain reviewable.
Read the market record →A standard, implementation guide, connector, and production payer connection are different evidence states. The workflow map keeps those boundaries visible.
Read the market record →Pharmacy ePA stakeholders need a version-specific migration, testing, and trading-partner readiness plan distinct from medical-service FHIR implementation.
Coverage-criteria provenance, delegation records, version control, and regulator-ready exports become more explicit enterprise requirements.
DME suppliers and patient-access teams need code-level, date-specific requirement discovery and must also track supplier exemption status.
Pharmacy ePA networks, payers, PBMs, EHRs, pharmacies, clearinghouses, and FHIR infrastructure providers need a scenario plan that preserves the distinction between current obligations and proposed changes.
Plan-level public disclosures create a new benchmarking input, but files require normalization by entity, population, period, request type, and denominator before comparison.
Provider routing logic and training materials must reflect service, plan, date, and exclusion details rather than a generic payer-to-delegate relationship.
The research connects the provider market, normalized capabilities, authority records, operating domains, and source limitations rather than presenting a score or universal winner.
Read the report →