LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement/Anthem Caves in Spine Surgery Lawsuit. Must Pay.
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

Anthem Caves in Spine Surgery Lawsuit. Must Pay.

January 28, 2019 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

Anthem Caves in Spine Surgery Lawsuit. Must Pay.
Source: Public Domain Pictures
#spinesurgerySecondary#settlement#anthem

Between August 2013 and August 2016 Anthem, Inc., one of the largest medical insurers in the United States, categorically DENIED all requests to reimburse two-level cervical artificial disc replacement surgery (2C-ADR) because, they said, it was “investigational.”

In July 2017, Lawrence Bradford filed a class action suit against Anthem Inc. on behalf of all similarly situated plaintiffs, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. Bradford claimed that Anthem categorically denied all requests for two-level cervical artificial disc replacement (2C-ADR) surgery because the procedure was “investigational.” Failing to state a specific reason or reasons for denying claims and failing to provide the specific plan provisions on which a determination is based is a violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA).

Because Anthem failed to state a specific reason or reasons for labeling cervical artificial discs as “investigational” and therefore denied claims and failed to provide the specific plan provisions on which a determination was based, claimed Bradford, is a violation of ERISA.

The two parties mediated and came to a settlement.

According to the terms of the settlement, all class members (“class members” are defined as patients who were denied two-level cervical artificial disc treatment from August 2013 when the FDA approved the surgery to August 2016 when Anthem began to cover the surgery) who paid out-of-pocket for 2C-ADR can make claims for reimbursement and class members who have not yet undergone 2C-ADR and are still covered by Anthem can submit their requests for approval. Anthem will reimburse class members for out-of-pocket expenses up to a maximum of $35,000. Anthem also agreed to pay the class counsel’s attorney fees.

But Anthem was not done playing games.

The massive insurance company decided to notify patients who’d been denied treatment by first class mail.

The terms of the settlement did not specify how patients were to be notified, it only said that the proposed settlement be mailed no later than 28 days after the entry of the preliminary approval order.

Advertisement

Back to court the attorneys went, and a federal court judge just ruled that Anthem, Inc. cannot use first class mail to notify the members of class about a spinal surgery settlement.

Judge Andre Birotte, Jr. of the United States District Court for the Central District of California said that notifying a class by a single piece of first-class mail was inadequate.

Judge Birotte ordered Anthem to at least use Priority Mail Flat Rate Envelopes and mark the envelopes with “attention-getting text” to maximize the likelihood that the class members would pay attention to the notice.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy