(a) A peer reviewer’s report, including a report used to deny preauthorization, shall document the objective medical findings and evidence-based medicine that supports the opinion and include:
(1) the peer reviewer’s name and professional Texas license number;
(2) certification that the peer reviewer holds the appropriate credentials as defined in § 180.1 of this title (relating to Definitions);
(3) a summary of the reviewer’s qualifications;
(4) a list of all medical records and other documents reviewed by the peer reviewer, including dates of those documents;
(5) a summary of the clinical history; and
(6) an analysis and explanation for the peer review recommendation, including the findings and conclusions used to support the recommendations.
(b) The insurance carrier shall not request subsequent peer reviews regarding the medical necessity of health care for dates of services for which a peer review report has already been issued unless:
(1) the review is for a different health care service requiring review by a different peer review specialty;
(2) the insurance carrier needs clarification of the peer review opinion based on new medical evidence that has not been presented to the peer reviewer;
(3) the peer reviewer failed to fully address the questions submitted by the insurance carrier; or
(4) for purposes other than determining medical necessity of the health care.
(c) The insurance carrier shall submit a copy of a peer review report to the treating doctor and the health care provider who rendered or requested the health care, as well as the injured employee and injured employee’s representative, if any, when the insurance carrier uses the report to deny the compensability or extent of the compensable injury or reduce or deny income or medical benefits of an injured employee.
(d) A peer reviewer and insurance carrier shall maintain accurate records to reflect information regarding requests, reports, and results for peer reviews. The insurance carrier and peer reviewer shall submit such information at the request of the division in the form and manner proscribed by the division. The division will monitor peer review use, activity, and decisions which may result in the initiation of a medical quality review or other division action.
(e) The commissioner may impose sanctions on health care providers performing peer reviews pursuant to § 180.26 and § 180.27 of this title (relating to Criteria for Imposing, Recommending and Determining Sanctions; Other Remedies; and Sanctions Process/Appeals/Restoration, respectively) and other applicable provisions of the Labor Code and division rules. The commissioner may prohibit a doctor from conducting peer reviews for any of the following:
(1) non-compliance with the provisions of § 180.22 of this title (relating to Health Care Provider Roles and Responsibilities), this section, or applicable provisions of the Act, or a rule, order, or decision of the commissioner;
(2) failure to consider all records provided for review;
(3) a history of improper or unjustified decisions regarding the medical necessity of health care reviewed;
(4) failure to hold the appropriate professional license issued by this state;
(5) review of health care without holding the appropriate credentials, as defined in § 180.1 of this title, in a health care specialty appropriate to the type of health care reviewed; or
(6) any other violation of the Labor Code or division rules.
(f) In accordance with Labor Code § 408.0046, an entity requesting a peer review must obtain and provide to the doctor providing peer review services all relevant and updated medical records.
The provisions of this §180.28 adopted to be effective August 16, 2006, 31 TexReg 6370; amended to be effective January 9, 2011, 35 TexReg 11873.