• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

CMS’ New Rule Aims to Streamline the Prior Authorization Process

by Karen Appold • December 2, 2025

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

Impacts on Practices and Patients

You Might Also Like

  • Otolaryngology Practices Use Digital Tools to Pre-authorize—With Mixed Results
  • A Look at How the AMA Supports Members and Otolaryngologists at Large
  • Do Prior Authorization Requests Hurt Patient Care?
  • Countdown to ICD-10 Winds Down as October 1 Start Date Approaches
Explore This Issue
December 2025

The need to obtain prior authorizations contributes to delays in treatment, staff burnout, and patient frustration, Mr. DeCabo said. On average, an otolaryngologist can devote 13 staff hours every week to processing roughly 41 prior authorization requests. In the 2022 American Medical Association survey, 90% of physicians said prior authorization requirements harm patient clinical outcomes (AMA. https://tinyurl.com/5v52dscr).

Prior authorizations are typically triggered for high-cost or device-intensive procedures. Inconsistencies among different insurance payers add another significant layer of complexity to administering prior authorizations. “What one insurer considers routine, another may flag for prior approval, forcing otolaryngology practices to navigate a maze of varying requirements, approval criteria, and documentation standards,” Mr. DeCabo said.

A lack of standardization means that physicians must maintain separate protocols for different payers, each with unique forms, timelines, and approval criteria. “What should be straightforward medical decision making is a complex administrative exercise,” Mr. DeCabo said.

Dr. Troublefield’s practice is inundated with prior authorization requests. Some require additional information about routine procedures, such as a tonsillectomy after a peritonsillar abscess. “Although the surgical indications are clear, some insurers insist that we obtain their permission before proceeding with an undeniably necessary surgery,” she said.

Another example is insurers’ need to authorize an image-guided CAT scan for patients who had prior endoscopic sinus surgery. “This should not require prior authorization because surgical indications are firmly established in otolaryngology literature,” Dr. Troublefield said.

Southcoast Physicians Group is unable to book surgeries in a timely manner when they require prior authorizations because it takes approximately 14 days for insurance companies to make these decisions. “When a patient requires a stat CAT scan, it can take up to five days for clearance,” she said. “Having a patient wait up to 19 days before we can obtain a biopsy to confirm our clinical suspicion can be potentially harmful to patients.”

Charleston ENT & Allergy currently submits prior authorization approval requests electronically through insurance payer portals when available, said Dr. Brown, which he believes is typical at other practices. Some practices have implemented AI bots that automatically navigate payer portals, submit prior authorization requests, and document responses in the system. When automation fails, dedicated teams handle phone-based communications with insurers.

“Current AI implementation costs are prohibitively expensive for many practices,” Dr. Brown said. “I fear that upcoming regulatory requirements will force practices to invest in costly technologies they can’t afford, creating financial strain while attempting to improve administrative efficiency.”

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Single Page

Filed Under: Business of Medicine, Features, Health Policy, Home Slider Tagged With: CMS' New RuleIssue: December 2025

You Might Also Like:

  • Otolaryngology Practices Use Digital Tools to Pre-authorize—With Mixed Results
  • A Look at How the AMA Supports Members and Otolaryngologists at Large
  • Do Prior Authorization Requests Hurt Patient Care?
  • Countdown to ICD-10 Winds Down as October 1 Start Date Approaches

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Has experience as a patient influenced your professional development or demeanor?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • A Resident’s View of AI in Otolaryngology
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • Resident Pearls: Pediatric Otolaryngologists Share Tips for Safer, Smarter Tonsillectomies
  • A Letter to My Younger Self: Making Deliberate Changes Can Help Improve the Sense of Belonging
  • ENTtoday Welcomes Resident Editorial Board Members
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • Growing Use of Tranexamic Acid in Otolaryngology

    • Office Laryngoscopy Is Not Aerosol Generating When Evaluated by Optical Particle Sizer

    • Top 10 LARY and LIO Articles of 2024

    • Empty Nose Syndrome: Physiological, Psychological, or Perhaps a Little of Both?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Keeping Watch for Skin Cancers on the Head and Neck

    • Why So Loud? Rethinking the Volume of Our Everyday Experiences
    • How Audiologists and Researchers Are Shaping Military Hearing Health Practices
    • A Case for Endoscopic Surgery: How Personal Experience Influenced Pursuit of a New Skill
    • The Path to Department Chair: Arriving and Thriving
    • Rewriting the Rules of Rhinosinusitis

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2026 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939