Back to Resources
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Strip all PHI before pasting into Claude — Remove the patient's name, date of birth, medical record number, Social Security number, and any other identifying information. Use placeholders like "Patient A" or simply describe demographics generically. Claude operates outside your HIPAA-covered environment, so no protected health information should ever appear in a prompt.
Quote the denial letter's exact language — When writing an appeal, include the insurer's stated denial reason verbatim in your prompt. Claude can then draft a response that directly refutes that specific rationale rather than producing a generic appeal letter.
Include standardized outcome measures with context — Scores like LEFS 42/80 or Oswestry 48% are powerful, but only if the reviewer understands them. Add a line like "normative score for age group: 72/80" or "score >40% = severe disability" so Claude can weave that context into the narrative.
Reference payer-specific criteria when you know them — If you know your patient's insurer follows InterQual, MCG, or a specific LCD, mention it in the prompt. For example, add "This patient is covered under Medicare — reference the Outpatient PT LCD for [MAC jurisdiction]" to get more targeted language.
Keep a log of successful appeal language — When an appeal is approved, save the key phrases and structure that worked. Over time, you can feed Claude examples of your winning letters with "Use a similar tone and structure to this approved appeal: [paste excerpt]" to improve future outputs.
5 Claude Prompts for SOAP Notes — Physical Therapists
5 Claude Prompts for Home Exercise Programs
Claude CoWork for Physical Therapists
ClaudePhysical TherapyBeginnerPrompt Pack
5 Claude Prompts for Insurance Appeals — Physical Therapists
Ready-to-use Claude prompts for writing medical necessity letters, insurance appeal narratives, and prior authorization documentation.
Why Use AI for Insurance Appeals?
Insurance denials are one of the most frustrating parts of physical therapy practice. When a payer denies continued visits or rejects a prior authorization, you are left writing detailed appeal letters that pull you away from patient care — often under tight filing deadlines. The clinical reasoning is in your head, but translating it into the specific language that payer review nurses and medical directors respond to takes time and mental energy most clinicians do not have at the end of a full caseload day.
Claude can help you draft appeal letters, medical necessity narratives, and peer-to-peer preparation notes significantly faster. You provide the clinical facts — the objective measurements, the functional deficits, the standardized outcome scores — and Claude structures them into a persuasive, well-organized argument that mirrors the format insurance reviewers expect to see. The result is a first draft you can refine and submit, not a finished product, but a massive head start.
These five prompts address the most common insurance documentation scenarios in PT: writing a medical necessity letter for continued care, appealing a visit denial, preparing prior authorization clinical documentation, getting ready for a peer-to-peer review call, and justifying functional limitations that a desk reviewer may not fully appreciate from codes alone.
The Prompts
Prompt 1: Medical Necessity Letter for Continued PT
Use when a payer requires justification to authorize additional visits beyond the initial approval.
You are a physical therapy insurance documentation specialist. Write a medical necessity letter requesting continued physical therapy services for the following patient. The letter should be addressed to the insurance medical reviewer and make a clear, evidence-based case for why additional visits are required.
Patient overview:
- Diagnosis: [e.g., adhesive capsulitis R shoulder, ICD-10 M75.01]
- Insurance: [e.g., Aetna PPO]
- Visits used: [e.g., 18 of 20 authorized]
- Additional visits requested: [e.g., 12 more visits over 6 weeks]
Progress to date:
- Baseline functional measure: [e.g., DASH 68 at eval]
- Current functional measure: [e.g., DASH 41 at visit 18]
- ROM changes: [e.g., shoulder flexion 88° → 132°, ER 15° → 38°]
- Strength changes: [e.g., shoulder flexion 3/5 → 4/5]
- Functional gains: [e.g., can now reach cupboard height, returned to light desk work]
Remaining deficits requiring skilled care:
- [e.g., ER ROM remains 22° below functional threshold for hair care and dressing]
- [e.g., unable to lift >8 lbs overhead — required for job duties as warehouse worker]
- [e.g., end-range mobilization techniques require skilled PT delivery]
Instructions:
- Open with a clear statement of the request (number of visits, frequency, duration)
- Present measurable progress as evidence that PT is effective and the patient is not at a plateau
- Articulate specific functional deficits that remain and why they require skilled intervention
- Explain what will likely happen if PT is discontinued prematurely (regression risk, surgical risk, etc.)
- Close with the treating therapist's recommendation and credentials
- Use professional, objective tone appropriate for utilization reviewExample Output:
Dear Medical Reviewer,
>
I am writing to request authorization for 12 additional physical therapy visits over six weeks for this 47-year-old warehouse worker diagnosed with right shoulder adhesive capsulitis (M75.01). The patient has completed 18 of 20 authorized visits and has demonstrated consistent, measurable progress: DASH score improved from 68 to 41, shoulder flexion increased from 88 degrees to 132 degrees, and external rotation improved from 15 degrees to 38 degrees. Shoulder flexion strength has progressed from 3/5 to 4/5. Functionally, the patient can now reach cupboard height and has returned to light desk duties. However, external rotation remains 22 degrees below the threshold required for basic self-care tasks including hair washing and overhead dressing. The patient is unable to lift more than 8 pounds overhead, a core requirement of their warehouse position. These deficits require skilled interventions including Grade III-IV glenohumeral mobilization and progressive end-range loading that cannot be replicated independently. Discontinuing therapy at this stage risks regression of ROM gains and potential progression toward surgical capsular release. Continued skilled physical therapy is medically necessary to restore safe functional independence and facilitate return to full work duty.
>
Respectfully,
Dr. Sarah Mitchell, PT, DPT, OCS
Prompt 2: Appeal After Visit Denial
For when an insurance company denies visits that have already occurred or denies a continuation request.
You are a physical therapy insurance appeals specialist. Write a formal appeal letter responding to a denial of physical therapy services. The tone should be professional and fact-based, citing specific clinical evidence that contradicts the denial rationale.
Denial details:
- Insurance company: [e.g., UnitedHealthcare]
- Denial date: [date]
- Denial reason stated: [e.g., "Patient has reached maximum therapeutic benefit" / "Services not medically necessary" / "Frequency exceeds guidelines"]
- Denial reference/case number: [number]
Clinical counter-evidence:
- Current functional limitations: [list 2-3 specific measurable deficits]
- Objective progress trend: [e.g., LEFS improved 12 points over last 6 visits — still 22 points below functional threshold]
- Standardized outcome score: [tool and score showing patient is not yet at ceiling]
- Skilled interventions still required: [e.g., joint mobilization Grade III-IV, progressive neuromuscular re-education for dynamic balance]
- Risk of discontinuation: [e.g., high fall risk — BBS 38/56, patient had 2 falls in past month]
Supporting references (optional):
- [e.g., APTA clinical practice guideline for knee OA recommends 12-16 visits]
- [e.g., Medicare LCD for outpatient PT in this region]
Instructions:
- Directly address and refute the stated denial reason with objective data
- Emphasize that the patient is making measurable progress and has not plateaued
- Reference any applicable clinical practice guidelines or payer LCD/NCD criteria
- Request a specific action (overturn denial, authorize X additional visits)
- Keep the letter to one page (~400 words)Example Output:
Re: Appeal of Denial — Case #UHC-2026-4471829
>
Dear Appeals Committee,
>
I am writing to formally appeal the denial of continued physical therapy services issued on February 12, 2026, citing "patient has reached maximum therapeutic benefit." The clinical evidence directly contradicts this determination. The patient's Lower Extremity Functional Scale score has improved 12 points over the last six visits, rising from 31/80 to 43/80. This score remains 22 points below the minimum functional threshold of 65/80 needed for safe independent community ambulation and return to work. The patient's Berg Balance Scale score is 38/56, which classifies them as a moderate-to-high fall risk. The patient has sustained two falls in the past month, including one requiring an emergency department visit. Current treatment includes Grade III-IV joint mobilization and progressive neuromuscular re-education for dynamic balance — skilled interventions that cannot be performed independently or by a caregiver. The APTA clinical practice guideline for knee osteoarthritis recommends 12 to 16 visits for this presentation, and the patient has completed only 10. Discontinuing services at this stage places the patient at significant risk for further falls, potential fracture, and substantially higher downstream medical costs. I respectfully request that this denial be overturned and eight additional visits be authorized to allow the patient to reach safe functional independence.
>
Respectfully,
Dr. James Kowalski, PT, DPT
Prompt 3: Prior Authorization Clinical Documentation
For submitting clinical information to support a prior authorization request before treatment begins.
You are a physical therapy documentation specialist. Write a clinical summary for a prior authorization request that clearly establishes medical necessity for the proposed plan of care.
Authorization request:
- Requested visits: [e.g., 24 visits over 12 weeks]
- Requested frequency: [e.g., 2x/week]
- CPT codes anticipated: [e.g., 97110, 97140, 97530, 97112]
Clinical presentation:
- Diagnosis: [ICD-10 code and description]
- Onset/mechanism: [e.g., gradual onset over 3 months / post-surgical 4 weeks ago / MVA on date]
- Referring physician: [name, specialty]
- Relevant imaging/diagnostics: [e.g., MRI showing L4-L5 disc protrusion with moderate foraminal narrowing]
Functional limitations:
- [e.g., unable to sit >15 minutes — required for full-time desk job]
- [e.g., unable to ascend stairs without rail — lives in 2-story home]
- [e.g., Oswestry Disability Index score: 52% (severe disability)]
Examination findings:
- Key objective deficits: [ROM, strength, special tests, gait deviations]
- Standardized outcome measure: [tool name and baseline score]
Proposed treatment plan:
- [e.g., manual therapy for lumbar segmental mobility, core stabilization progression, functional task training for work simulation]
Instructions:
- Format as a structured clinical summary, not a letter
- Lead with the functional limitations and their impact on daily life and work
- Clearly link each proposed CPT code to a specific clinical deficit
- Include the standardized outcome measure baseline to enable future progress tracking
- Keep under 350 wordsExample Output:
Prior Authorization Clinical Summary
>
Authorization Request: 24 visits over 12 weeks (2x/week). CPT codes: 97110, 97140, 97530, 97112.
>
Diagnosis: L4-L5 disc protrusion with moderate foraminal narrowing (M51.16). Onset: gradual over three months with acute exacerbation six weeks ago. Referring physician: Dr. Robert Tran, Orthopedic Surgery. MRI dated January 15, 2026 confirms L4-L5 disc protrusion with moderate left foraminal narrowing and mild L5 nerve root impingement.
>
Functional Limitations: Patient is unable to sit longer than 15 minutes, which is required for their full-time accounting position. Patient cannot ascend stairs without using a handrail and lives in a two-story home with the only bathroom on the second floor. Oswestry Disability Index score: 52%, indicating severe disability.
>
Examination Findings: Lumbar flexion limited to 40% of expected range. Left L4-L5 segmental hypomobility on PA spring testing. Left hip flexor and quadriceps strength 4-/5. Positive left femoral nerve tension test. Antalgic gait with decreased left step length. Baseline ODI: 52%.
>
Proposed Treatment: Manual therapy targeting lumbar segmental mobility (97140), progressive core stabilization program (97110), neuromuscular re-education for gait normalization (97112), and functional task training including prolonged sitting tolerance and stair negotiation for return to work and safe home mobility (97530).
Prompt 4: Peer-to-Peer Review Preparation
For preparing talking points before a phone call with the insurance company's reviewing physician or nurse.
You are a physical therapy clinical consultant. Help me prepare for a peer-to-peer review call with an insurance company medical reviewer. Organize my clinical data into a clear, persuasive verbal presentation I can reference during the call.
Case summary:
- Patient diagnosis: [e.g., post-op ACL reconstruction with meniscus repair, 10 weeks post-surgery]
- Denial reason: [e.g., "requested visits exceed typical recovery timeline"]
- Visits used so far: [X]
- Additional visits requested: [X]
Key clinical talking points:
- Current objective status: [e.g., knee flexion 98°, extension -8°, quad strength 3-/5, antalgic gait pattern]
- Functional deficits: [e.g., cannot descend stairs reciprocally, unable to tolerate standing >30 min for work]
- Complicating factors: [e.g., concomitant meniscus repair requires slower progression per surgeon protocol, patient is a 58-year-old manual laborer]
- Progress trend: [e.g., consistent gains of 8-10° flexion per 2-week period]
- Surgical protocol reference: [e.g., surgeon's protocol restricts OKC exercises until week 12]
Instructions:
- Organize into a bulleted script with clear sections: Opening Statement, Clinical Status, Progress Evidence, Justification for Continued Care, and Closing Request
- Anticipate likely reviewer objections and prepare 1-sentence rebuttals
- Emphasize measurable functional deficits over impairment-only data
- Include any relevant clinical guidelines or surgical protocols that support the requested timeline
- Keep the script to one page of talking pointsExample Output:
Opening Statement: "Thank you for taking the time for this review. I am the treating physical therapist for a 58-year-old manual laborer who is 10 weeks post ACL reconstruction with concomitant medial meniscus repair. I would like to present the clinical evidence supporting an additional 12 visits."
>
Clinical Status: Knee flexion 98 degrees, extension deficit of 8 degrees, quadriceps strength 3-/5, antalgic gait pattern with decreased stance time on the surgical limb.
>
Progress Evidence: "The patient has gained 8 to 10 degrees of flexion each two-week period, demonstrating a consistent upward trajectory. This is not a plateau — this is steady, measurable recovery within the expected timeline for a combined ACL-meniscus repair."
>
Anticipated Objection — "Visits exceed typical timeline": "The concomitant meniscus repair requires a slower rehabilitation progression per the surgeon's protocol, which restricts open kinetic chain exercises until week 12. This patient cannot be compared to an isolated ACL reconstruction timeline."
>
Justification for Continued Care: Patient cannot descend stairs reciprocally, which is required to enter and exit their workplace. Patient cannot tolerate standing beyond 30 minutes, making return to their construction job impossible. The surgeon's protocol supports continued supervised rehabilitation through at least week 16.
>
Closing Request: "Based on the consistent measurable progress, the documented functional deficits, and the surgical protocol requirements, I am requesting 12 additional visits to enable this patient to safely return to work and independent function."
Prompt 5: Functional Limitation Justification
For cases where a reviewer questions whether the patient's impairments actually translate to meaningful functional deficits.
You are a physical therapy documentation specialist. Write a functional limitation narrative that clearly connects this patient's objective impairments to specific real-world activity restrictions. Insurance reviewers often see ROM and strength numbers without understanding the functional impact — this narrative must bridge that gap.
Patient profile:
- Diagnosis: [e.g., bilateral knee osteoarthritis, grade III]
- Age/occupation/living situation: [e.g., 71-year-old retired teacher, lives alone in single-story home, primary caregiver for spouse with dementia]
Objective impairments:
- [e.g., bilateral knee flexion limited to 95°]
- [e.g., bilateral quad strength 3/5]
- [e.g., TUG score: 19 seconds (fall risk threshold: >13.5s)]
- [e.g., 30-second sit-to-stand: 5 reps (normative for age: 12)]
Functional impact — connect each impairment to daily life:
- [e.g., limited knee flexion → cannot safely lower to toilet, cannot enter/exit bathtub]
- [e.g., quad weakness → 3 falls in past 2 months, cannot carry groceries from car]
- [e.g., elevated TUG → classified as high fall risk, unsafe to ambulate outdoors independently]
Instructions:
- Write in narrative paragraph format, not bullet points
- For each impairment, explicitly state the functional activity it prevents or limits
- Include the patient's living situation and social context to show real-world impact
- Reference normative data or functional thresholds where applicable
- Conclude with a statement of fall risk, safety concern, or risk of further functional decline
- Keep under 300 wordsExample Output:
Mrs. Delgado is a 71-year-old retired teacher who lives alone in a single-story home and serves as the primary caregiver for her spouse, who has been diagnosed with dementia. Her bilateral knee osteoarthritis, classified as Kellgren-Lawrence grade III, produces impairments that directly threaten her ability to live safely and independently. With bilateral knee flexion limited to 95 degrees, she cannot lower herself onto a standard toilet without grabbing a towel bar, which is not rated for weight-bearing and presents a fall hazard. She is unable to enter or exit her bathtub, and has resorted to sponge bathing for the past three months. Her bilateral quadriceps strength of 3/5 — roughly half the normative value for her age — means she cannot rise from a seated position without using her arms, and she has fallen three times in the past two months, once while carrying groceries from her car. Her Timed Up and Go score of 19 seconds exceeds the established fall-risk threshold of 13.5 seconds by a significant margin, and her 30-second sit-to-stand count of 5 repetitions is less than half the age-adjusted norm of 12 repetitions. Without continued skilled intervention to address these deficits, Mrs. Delgado faces an escalating fall risk, likely loss of independent living status, and inability to continue providing the daily care her spouse depends on.