OpenPayer is powered by Trek Health's payer performance platform. Trek continuously ingests, validates, and normalizes Transparency in Coverage data alongside payer policies and other commercial payer data to create a structured payer intelligence foundation. OpenPayer uses this foundation to deliver personalized search results, dynamically generated policy pages, and tailored policy monitoring based on each user's payers, specialties, billing codes, and areas of interest. The same intelligence powers broader payer performance workflows, including reimbursement benchmarking, contract evaluation, payer negotiations, and financial decision-making.

ModifiedUnitedHealthcarePolicy CS131OH.C

Visual Information Processing Evaluation and Orthoptic and Vision Therapy (for Ohio Only)

Customize your policy alerts

Sign up for UnitedHealthcare Policy CS131OH.C alerts

Get alerted when Policy CS131OH.C changes without checking for updates manually.

Monitor payer policy activity

Receive email alerts as soon as relevant payer policies are published or updated.

Policy governing coverage and medical necessity for orthoptic (vision) therapy and visual information processing evaluation for members in Ohio; specifies covered indication(s), unproven indications, and application of Ohio Administrative Code for services deemed unproven or limited.

Policy Summary

PayerUnitedHealthcare

PolicyVisual Information Processing Evaluation and Orthoptic and Vision Therapy (for Ohio Only)

Policy CodePolicy CS131OH.C

Change TypeRevised coverage & exclusions listscode removals

Effective DateMar 1, 2026

Next Review DateN/A

Key ActionWhen requesting coverage for digital/dichoptic amblyopia therapies, document baseline visual acuity, prescribed dosing and adherence, and prior or concurrent conventional therapy details for prior authorization.

SourceLink

POLICY UPDATE CHANGES

Revised list of proven and medically necessary indications; removed occlusion therapy or pharmacologic penalization therapy for treating Amblyopia and removed prism adaptation therapy for treating Esotropia.

Revised list of unproven and not medically necessary indications; removed virtual perception therapy for learning disabilities and vision restoration therapy for visual field deficits following stroke or neurotrauma, and removed visual information processing evaluation to diagnose learning disabilities.

Removed CPT code 92499 from applicable codes.

Updated Description of Services, Clinical Evidence, and References sections to reflect current information.

1state-specific (Ohio only)

Convergence CIproven covered indication

3+unproven/NMN items

6example codes listed

mixed/limitedevidence strength (many indications)

Coverage Criteria and Rationale

Orthoptic/Vision Therapy – Convergence Insufficiency

Covered when ALL of the following are met

Convergence Insufficiency therapy coverage: Orthoptic Therapy or Vision Therapy is considered proven and medically necessary for treating Convergence Insufficiency.

Supported by high‑certainty evidence from a Cochrane systematic review/NMA and RCTs demonstrating that office‑based vergence/accommodative therapy with home reinforcement improves near point of convergence (NPC) and positive fusional vergence (PFV) in children; evidence in adults is less clear.

Digital/Dichoptic Amblyopia Therapy

Evidence-based coverage considerations when evaluating digital/dichoptic therapies for amblyopia:

General evidence-based criteria: Therapy should be prescribed with documented baseline amblyopic eye visual acuity and a treatment regimen consistent with published trials (examples: 60–90 minutes/day for up to 12–16 weeks); objective or documented adherence monitoring should be provided; documentation should reference prior or concurrent conventional therapy (optical correction and/or patching or pharmacologic penalization) when applicable.

Policy Summary

PayerUnitedHealthcare

PolicyVisual Information Processing Evaluation and Orthoptic and Vision Therapy (for Ohio Only)

Policy CodePolicy CS131OH.C

Change TypeRevised coverage & exclusions listscode removals

Effective DateMar 1, 2026

Next Review DateN/A

SourceLink

On This Page

see trial dosing (e.g., 90 min/day × 5 days/week for 16 weeks; 1 hr/day × 6 days/week for 12 weeks)

Randomized trials (e.g., CureSight, Xiao et al.) show VA improvement versus patching or glasses-alone comparators but have limitations including short follow-up and variable controls; device‑specific documentation (prescription, indication, adherence) is required for consideration.

Orthoptic VT for Exotropia

Orthoptic/office-based VT for intermittent exotropia (IXT):

Evidence for OBVAT in IXT: Office‑based vergence and anti‑suppression therapy (OBVAT) has limited RCT evidence showing short‑term improvement in office control scores compared with observation (e.g., Ma et al. 2024 at 17 weeks); long‑term benefits are not established.n/a

Existing studies are limited by small samples and lack of long‑term follow‑up; non‑surgical options such as part‑time patching also have RCT support.

Intermittent Exotropia / Pediatric Strabismus

Evidence summary for strabismus (exotropia/esotropia) interventions

RCT and meta‑analysis findings: Multiple randomized trials and meta‑analyses report that interventions including office‑based vergence/anti‑suppression therapy, part‑time occlusion/patching, and overminus/prism approaches can improve short‑term control scores, reduce angle of deviation, and improve near stereopsis in children with IXT or esotropia compared with observation.

Evidence is limited by heterogeneity, small samples, and short follow‑up; long‑term efficacy remains uncertain.

Divergence Excess / Insufficiency

Divergence disorders

Evidence: No well‑designed clinical trials were identified evaluating vision therapy for divergence excess or divergence insufficiency.

Absence of high‑quality evidence limits support for coverage of VT solely for divergence disorders unless new robust data are provided.

Post‑Stroke and Post‑TBI Visual Rehabilitation

Stroke and traumatic brain injury related visual rehabilitation

VPL/VR and oculomotor interventions: Personalized visual perceptual learning (VPL) and VR‑based training and targeted oculomotor/visual scanning therapies have shown clinically meaningful within‑group improvements in visual field area or functional measures in adherent participants over short follow‑up (typically ~12 weeks) in some RCTs, but between‑group differences and evidence quality are inconsistent.

Systematic reviews conclude overall evidence is limited or low quality; requests should include documentation of baseline deficits (e.g., Humphrey perimetry), adherence, objective outcome measures, and planned treatment duration.

Amblyopia / Pediatric recommendations

Guideline-aligned coverage approach referenced in document:

Amblyopia_management: Coverage aligns with standard amblyopia care: ALL of the following must be met — optical correction as the initial therapy; if insufficient improvement, consider patching or pharmacologic penalization per guideline‑recommended dosing; vision therapy is not routinely recommended for amblyopia due to insufficient evidence.

Based on AAO Preferred Practice Pattern (2021, updated 2023) and related specialty guidance.

Stroke / Traumatic brain injury

Post-stroke and acquired brain injury vision interventions:

Post-stroke_VT: Offer specialist orthoptist assessment for hospitalized stroke patients and consider eye movement or visual scanning training for persistent hemianopia or unilateral spatial neglect; some small RCTs report benefit but overall evidence is limited.

Recommendations referenced from NICE 2023 and individual RCTs (Van Wyk et al.).

mTBI

mTBI and visual symptom management:

mTBI_assessment_interventions: Current systematic reviews identify altered saccades, smooth pursuit, and vergence measurements as useful for detection but conclude evidence is insufficient to recommend specific assessment protocols or particular treatment modalities for mTBI‑related visual symptoms.

Based on Hunt et al. 2016 and VA/DoD 2022 guidance noting inadequate evidence for recommending specific treatments.

Dyslexia / Learning disabilities

Dyslexia and learning disabilities:

Dyslexia_VT: Evidence for vision therapy to treat dyslexia or learning disabilities is limited and mixed; small single‑center studies show improvement in selected binocular vision parameters while higher‑quality trials of interventions like colored filters have inconsistent results.

Overall insufficient high‑quality evidence to support VT as an effective primary treatment for dyslexia or learning disabilities.

Coverage Rationale (updated)

Policy history indicates revisions to the lists of proven/medically necessary and unproven/not medically necessary indications.

policy_revision: Policy revised 03/01/2026: the list of proven and medically necessary indications was updated; certain therapies were removed from prior lists (e.g., occlusion therapy or pharmacologic penalization for amblyopia; prism adaptation for esotropia); some items were also removed from the unproven list.

See Policy History/Instructions for Use for details and state/contractual applicability.

The policy states that Orthoptic Therapy or Vision Therapy for treating Convergence Insufficiency is considered proven and medically necessary. Conversely, orthoptic or vision therapy for all other indications is listed as unproven and not medically necessary due to insufficient evidence of efficacy. (See Coverage Rationale and Policy History for recent revisions.)

The document reports that no well‑designed clinical trials were identified supporting vision therapy for several conditions, including convergence excess, nystagmus, divergence excess, and divergence insufficiency. This lack of high‑quality trial evidence is cited as a primary reason these indications are considered unproven.

Meta-analytic and systematic review evidence for prism adaptation and related restitutive/substitutive approaches after stroke is limited. The 2019 Cochrane review found insufficient or low/very‑low quality evidence to draw conclusions about restitutive interventions and only low‑quality evidence for prism interventions improving scanning ability, with possible minor adverse effects. The policy notes these limitations and removes prism adaptation from the list of proven/medically necessary therapies for certain strabismus indications in its March 1, 2026 revision.

Professional guidelines cited in the policy do not recommend routine screening or treatment of 'defective eye teaming' or accommodative disorders as causes of educational impairment. Initial amblyopia management emphasizes refractive correction followed by conventional treatments (e.g., patching or pharmacologic penalization), and systematic guideline statements find insufficient evidence to support routine use of vision therapy techniques as primary treatments for educational or learning‑related impairment.

The Policy History (effective 03/01/2026) documents an operational revision: certain therapies were removed from the list of proven/medically necessary indications. Specifically, occlusion therapy or pharmacologic penalization therapy for treating amblyopia and prism adaptation therapy for treating esotropia were removed from the proven list as part of the coverage rationale update.

The policy reiterates that Orthoptic/Vision Therapy for indications other than convergence insufficiency is classified as unproven and not medically necessary. The March 1, 2026 revision clarifies and operationalizes this stance within the Coverage Rationale and aligns exclusions with Ohio‑specific review requirements.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses summarized in the policy show mixed results comparing binocular/dichoptic therapies with conventional patching. Some meta-analyses (e.g., Roda et al.) found no significant difference in visual acuity or stereopsis between binocular treatment and patching, indicating that binocular therapy has not consistently been shown to replace conventional patching in RCTs.

The policy states that no well‑designed clinical trials were identified evaluating vision therapy for divergence excess or divergence insufficiency. Because of this evidence gap, the policy does not support routine coverage for VT when requested solely for these divergence disorders.

The policy concludes there is insufficient or limited evidenceinsufficient evidence to recommend any particular modality for visual symptoms after mild TBI; therefore VT is not supported as a proven primary therapy for these indications in the absence of objective ocular findings.

Operationally, the policy revision on 03/01/2026 updated both the proven/medically necessary and unproven/not medically necessary lists. Several items were removed from each list, reflecting reassessment of prior positions; providers should reference the current Coverage Rationale and Policy History for details on removed items and coding changes.

Procedure and Billing Codes

Applicable procedure codesCPT/HCPCS

0687T	Treatment of amblyopia using an online digital program; device supply, educational set-up, and initial session
0688T	Treatment of amblyopia using an online digital program; assessment of patient performance and program data by physician or other qualified health care professional, with report, per calendar month
0704T	Remote treatment of amblyopia using an eye tracking device; device supply with initial set-up and patient education on use of equipment
0705T	Remote treatment of amblyopia using an eye tracking device; surveillance center technical support including data transmission with analysis, with a minimum of 18 training hours, each 30 days
0706T	Remote treatment of amblyopia using an eye tracking device; interpretation and report by physician or other qualified health care professional, per calendar month
92065	Orthoptic training; performed by a physician or other qualified health care professional
92066	Orthoptic training; under supervision of a physician or other qualified health care professional

Covered/Relevant Codesmixed

affected codes

Placeholder - specific CPT/HCPCS codes not provided in this document segment

Covered CPT Codesmixed

No codes listed

Removed CPT CodesCPTNot Covered

92499

Unlisted ophthalmological service or procedure (removed from applicable codes)

Prior Authorization, Documentation, and Denial Guidance

Prior Authorization

Ohio prior authorization/medical necessity review

This Medical Policy applies only in the state of Ohio. Prior authorization and any medical necessity review of services referenced in this policy will be conducted in accordance with Ohio Administrative Code 5160-1-01 and applicable Ohio Medicaid contract terms. Requests for services that are designated as unproven, not medically necessary, or that exceed any stated coverage/quantity limits will be evaluated against Ohio requirements and may be denied.

State-specific review: Ohio Administrative Code 5160-1-01 governs evaluation of unproven or limited services.

Prior Authorization

Prior authorization for digital amblyopia therapy

Prior authorization is required for requests to cover digital or dichoptic amblyopia therapeutics. Submission should include trial-like documentation: study design summary if relying on published evidence, patient age and diagnosis, baseline amblyopic eye visual acuity, prescribed dosing (daily minutes/hours, days per week, total planned duration), objective adherence data when available, and a clear statement of why standard first-line treatments were inadequate or inappropriate.

Prescribed dosing example: CureSight — 90 minutes/day, 5 days/week for 16 weeks (per pivotal RCT).
Prescribed dosing example: dichoptic therapeutic tablet/game protocols commonly 1 hour/day, 5–6 days/week for up to 12–16 weeks.

Prior Authorization

Prior authorization for VR/digital therapies

Prior authorization is required for proposed VR-based training or digital visual perceptual learning (VPL) therapies, including post‑operative VR training and post‑stroke VPL. Requests should include a protocol-like plan (training tasks, frequency, session length, total duration), pre-specified, objective outcome measures, and monitoring/adherence methods. When coverage is sought based on trial evidence, include the key trial details (population, duration, adherence, primary outcomes) and how the proposed plan aligns with studied protocols.

Post‑operative VR training: provide timing relative to surgery (e.g., initiated within 1 week post-op as in Zhang et al.).
Post‑stroke VPL: provide stroke chronicity, imaging confirmation of visual pathway lesion, and >3–6 months post‑stroke status if mirroring trial populations.

Documentation Required

Device-specific documentation for prescription digital therapeutics

When a prescription digital therapeutic or device (for example, CureSight, Luminopia One, RevitalVision/NeuroVision platforms) is prescribed, prior authorization must document the device name, FDA clearance/De Novo/510(k) status, the prescribed dosing schedule, and a monitoring plan for adherence and safety. Include device-specific instruction that the therapy will be used as intended (e.g., adjunct to full-time refractive correction for Luminopia One).

Document FDA status: CureSight (FDA clearance K221375), Luminopia One (De Novo DEN210005), RevitalVision (K012530).
Attach device prescribed parameters and any manufacturer-provided training/monitoring reports.

Note

Prior authorization and criteria source

Coverage decisions will be made considering InterQual clinical criteria, UnitedHealthcare medical policy and utilization guidelines, and any applicable Ohio Medicaid contractual requirements or OAC rules. If InterQual does not contain applicable criteria, UnitedHealthcare medical policies and Coverage Determination Guidelines approved for Ohio Medicaid may be used.

Primary criteria source: InterQual®; secondary sources: UnitedHealthcare Medical Policies, Coverage Determination Guidelines, Utilization Review Guidelines and Ohio Medicaid contract terms.

Denial Risk

Denial triggers

Requests are at risk of denial if the service requested is explicitly listed as unproven or not medically necessary in this policy, if required prior authorization is not obtained, or if documentation fails to demonstrate medical necessity per Ohio Administrative Code and contractual terms.

Denial triggers include: services designated unproven/uncovered in policy (for example, remote/digital amblyopia therapies listed as unproven), missing prior authorization, or failure to meet Ohio OAC 5160-1-01 medical necessity criteria.

Documentation Required

Documentation/adherence risk

A common reason for inadequate support of digital or home-based therapies is lack of objective adherence monitoring or short documented treatment duration. Prior authorization requests should include objective adherence data when available (device logs, cloud-based usage reports) and clearly specify the planned total treatment exposure consistent with clinical trial protocols.

If objective adherence data are not available, include parent-reported dosing logs and a plan for objective monitoring going forward.
Document total prescribed hours and anticipated milestones for reassessment.

Denial Risk

Evidence insufficiency for divergence disorders

The evidence base for vision therapy in divergence excess or divergence insufficiency is insufficient. Lack of well‑designed clinical trials may lead to denial of requests for vision therapy for these divergence disorders.

If requesting therapy for divergence disorders, include any available RCT-level evidence or rationale and be prepared for heightened scrutiny or possible denial.

Denial Risk

Limited evidence for stroke/TBI

Clinical evidence for orthoptic or vision therapy after stroke or traumatic brain injury is limited and of low quality. Requests for VT or digital VPL for stroke/TBI-related visual deficits should include high-quality supporting evidence, objective baseline and follow-up measures, and may still be denied or require stronger justification.

Preferred documentation: randomized trial data (if available), Humphrey visual field baseline and follow-up, functional ADL outcome measures, and objective adherence/training logs.
Be aware: older systematic reviews found insufficient/low-quality evidence for many restitutive interventions.

Denial Risk

Limited Evidence — Dyslexia/LD

Claims for vision therapy to treat dyslexia or other learning disabilities are at risk for denial because evidence is limited and often based on single-arm studies without clear linkage between VT and improved learning outcomes.

If requesting VT for learning disabilities, include objective measures linking visual function improvement to reading or academic outcomes and high-quality supporting studies.

Documentation Required

Required documentation

Required documentation for prior authorization requests must support the diagnosis and clearly describe the therapy modality (office‑based vs home‑based/digital), planned frequency, session length, total duration, and therapeutic objectives. For surgical adjuncts or post‑operative training include timing relative to surgery.

Specify if therapy is office-based vergence/accommodative therapy with home reinforcement (preferred for Convergence Insufficiency) or home-only programs.
If prior conventional therapies were tried, document type and duration (e.g., prior patching, atropine, refractive correction).

Documentation Required

Required clinical documentation

Provide baseline clinical measurements and objective outcome targets when seeking authorization: amblyopic eye best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), stereoacuity where available, office control scores for strabismus, Humphrey visual field metrics for VFDs, and validated functional assessments. Include prior treatment history and any comparator therapies used in trials cited.

Baseline amblyopic eye VA (logMAR or Snellen) and interocular difference.
Objective adherence measures (device logs) and parent-reported adherence when device logs unavailable.

Documentation Required

Screening and Assessment Documentation

Include results of formal vision screening or a comprehensive eye examination and a clinician assessment that references relevant AAO Preferred Practice Pattern guidance where appropriate. For community-screening referrals, document the screening protocol and reason for referral to eye care provider.

Screening documentation: date, screening method, pass/fail results, and referral recommendation.
Comprehensive exam: refractive correction status, binocular function testing, and any findings relevant to therapy selection.

Note

Reference governing requirements

When deciding coverage, reference InterQual criteria, UnitedHealthcare policies, and the governing federal, state (Ohio Administrative Code), and contractual requirements. In the event of any conflict, federal/state/contractual terms govern.

Cite the specific OAC provision (5160-1-01) and any applicable Ohio Medicaid contractual terms in the submission when relevant.

Documentation Required

Conventional therapy context

Conventional therapies and sequencing should be documented. Trials often compared binocular/dichoptic therapies against conventional patching or pharmacologic penalization; prior or concurrent use of conventional first-line therapies should be documented when seeking coverage for digital or adjunctive approaches.

Document prior refractive correction and duration, patching (hours/day, days), or atropine penalization and response.
If proposing digital therapy as adjunct or alternative, explain why standard therapies are unsuitable or have failed.

Step Therapy

Amblyopia treatment sequencing

Amblyopia treatment sequencing should follow standard of care: begin with full-time refractive correction, then conventional first-line therapies (patching or pharmacologic penalization) before considering experimental or digital therapies. Requests to use digital therapeutics as first-line should justify deviation from AAO recommendations.

Document attempts at refractive correction and objective response period prior to escalation.
If prescribing digital therapy after conventional care, include duration and response to prior therapy.

Clinical Background and Evidence Summary

Convergence insufficiency (CI) is described as an inability to maintain binocular function at near, producing symptoms and measurable objective deficits such as an abnormal near point of convergence (NPC), reduced positive fusional vergence (PFV), and elevated scores on the Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey (CISS). The policy notes that supervised office‑based vergence/accommodative therapy with home reinforcement has demonstrated benefit in randomized trials and systematic reviews for improving these clinical measures, supporting coverage for CI.

Key Definitions

Amblyopia — definition and brief context

Typical age/contextDevelops in early childhood when visual pathways are forming; untreated amblyopia increases risk of permanent vision loss in the affected eye.

Clinical relevanceAmblyopia management focuses on restoring visual input to the amblyopic eye (optical correction, patching, or pharmacologic penalization historically) with VT not routinely recommended as primary therapy per guideline summaries.

Source guidanceReferenced by AAPOS and AAO guidance cited in the policy for pediatric amblyopia management.

Convergence Insufficiency — definition

DefinitionInability to maintain binocular function while working at near distance; typically associated with intermittent outward turning of an eye (intermittent exotropia) during near tasks (AAPOS, 2020).

Clinical measuresObjective deficits measurable by near point of convergence (NPC), positive fusional vergence (PFV), and Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey (CISS).

Therapy implicationOrthoptic/vision therapy is considered proven and medically necessary for Convergence Insufficiency when coverage criteria are met (policy proven indication).

Orthoptic Therapy / Vision Therapy — definition

DefinitionA series of supervised in‑office exercises, usually weekly over several months, taught in the office with at‑home reinforcement to improve binocular function; may include lenses, prisms, filters, patches, electronic targets, and balance boards (AAPOS, 2020).

Providers/settingPerformed by orthoptists or qualified clinicians in optometric/ophthalmologic offices; combines office supervision with home practice.

TargetsAims to improve vergence, accommodation, ocular motility, binocular interaction, and visual information processing as indicated.

Dichoptic/digital therapeutic — description of home or clinic-delivered digital therapy

DescriptionHome‑ or clinic‑delivered visual therapy that presents different visual inputs to each eye (often contrast‑rebalanced) via games, movies, VR headsets, eye‑tracking devices, or dedicated devices to promote binocular interaction and use of the amblyopic eye.

Typical dosing in trialsCommon trial regimens include 1 hour/day to 90 minutes/day for multiple weeks up to 12–16 weeks; objective or documented adherence is required for assessment.

Comparative contextTrials compared dichoptic/digital therapeutics with conventional patching or glasses; documentation of baseline VA and concurrent/ prior conventional therapy is relevant for interpretation.

Intermittent exotropia (IXT) — definition and measurement context

DefinitionA childhood strabismus subtype characterized by intermittent outward deviation of one eye (intermittent exotropia, IXT).

Outcome measurementsClinical outcomes are measured using Office Control Score, prism and alternate cover test (PACT), and stereopsis measures in trials and reviews.

Evidence noteLimited RCT data show short‑term improvement in office control scores with office‑based vergence/anti‑suppression therapy (OBVAT) versus observation; long‑term benefit is not established.

Visual perceptual learning (VPL) — definition

DefinitionDigital visual perceptual learning (VPL) comprises computerized/VR training tasks (e.g., orientation, rotation, depth discrimination) delivered via head‑mounted displays aiming to improve visual field sensitivity or detection in post‑stroke visual field defects.

Delivery and regimenTypical studies used daily training (e.g., 5 days/week) for around 12 weeks with high adherence and objective perimetry (Humphrey) for outcomes.

Evidence summaryRCTs report clinically meaningful within‑group improvements in visual field area or sensitivity in adherent participants, but between‑group differences and overall evidence quality are limited.

Visual efficiency / Visual information processing — definition

DefinitionVisual efficiency includes basic visual physiological processes: visual acuity (and refractive error), accommodation, vergence, and ocular motility; visual information processing involves higher brain functions of perception, cognition, and integration with motor, auditory, language, and attention systems.

Clinical implicationDeficits in visual efficiency can affect visual information processing; treatment may require sequential management (refractive correction, visual efficiency therapy, then information processing interventions).

Guideline referenceDescribed in AOA guidance referenced by the policy for assessing visual efficiency and visual information processing problems.

Amblyopia treatment components — initial management and role of VT

Initial managementOptical correction of refractive error is the initial step in amblyopia care for children; this should precede other interventions.

Conventional first‑line therapiesPatching (occlusion) or pharmacologic penalization (atropine) are recognized first‑line options when refractive correction is insufficient per AAO/AAPOS guidance.

Role of Vision TherapyVision/orthoptic therapy is not routinely recommended as primary amblyopia treatment due to insufficient evidence; VT may be considered adjunctively but is not a guideline‑endorsed primary modality.

Definitions removed — list of definitions removed from the policy

Definitions removedOcclusion Therapy; Pharmacologic Penalization Therapy; Prism Adaptation Therapy; Vision Restoration Therapy (VRT).

Coding changeCPT code 92499 (Unlisted ophthalmological service or procedure) was removed from applicable codes.

Policy effectThese definitions and code removals reflect the policy revision effective 03/01/2026 and may affect prior coverage determinations and claims processing.

Policy Revision History

03/01/2026policy_revisionLatest

Revised Coverage Rationale: updated the lists of proven/medically necessary and unproven/not medically necessary indications; removed occlusion therapy and pharmacologic penalization for amblyopia, and removed prism adaptation therapy for esotropia.

03/01/2026definitions_removed

Removed definitions for Occlusion Therapy, Pharmacologic Penalization Therapy, Prism Adaptation Therapy, and Vision Restoration Therapy (VRT).

03/01/2026codes_removed

Removed CPT code 92499 from the applicable codes list.

03/01/2026supporting_information_updated

Updated Description of Services, Clinical Evidence, and References sections to reflect current information.