A patient sits down at checkout and asks why the balance is different from the number they were given. The coordinator pulls up the account and finds a note from six weeks earlier that says, in its entirety, "sent for approval." No date, no codes, no reference number, no scanned response, and no record of whether anything ever came back. Somewhere in a folder or an inbox there is probably a piece of paper with the answer on it. Nobody knows which one.
That is not a billing failure. It is a vocabulary failure with a documentation failure stapled to it. The office was never clear on what it sent, what the answer would actually be worth, or where the answer was supposed to live. This article sorts out the words, explains what a written benefit determination does and does not buy you, covers when sending one is worth the delay and when it is a habit quietly slowing the practice down, and shows how to record the answer so the person standing at checkout six weeks later can find it in ten seconds.
The Quick Answer
A predetermination is a question you choose to ask: you submit the planned treatment before doing it and the plan tells you, in writing, what it would pay if everything stayed the same. A preauthorization is permission the plan requires in advance for certain services, and skipping it can cost you the benefit entirely. The first is optional and informational. The second is a condition of payment. Every plan uses these words slightly differently, so the only question that matters operationally is: is this optional or required? Get that answer from the plan, per category, and write it down.
Neither one is a guarantee of payment, and this is where most of the pain comes from. A determination is a snapshot of the plan's answer on the day it was issued, conditioned on eligibility holding, on the annual maximum surviving whatever else the patient does in the meantime, and on the final claim matching what was submitted. "Approved" means the plan agreed this is a covered benefit under today's facts. It does not mean money has been set aside, because no money is ever set aside. Send one when the case is large, the plan requires it, or the history you need is history only the plan has. Skip it when the answer is already known, when treatment should not wait, or when the benefit is already spent and the answer is academic.
The Vocabulary, Because It Is Genuinely Inconsistent
Plans, clearinghouses, software vendors and dental teams all use these terms with slightly different edges. Here is what each one usually means, with the understanding that the plan document wins over any general definition.
| Term | What it usually means | Who started it | If you skip it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Predetermination | Voluntary submission of planned treatment for a written benefit determination before treatment | The office | Nothing, except that you lose the written answer |
| Pretreatment estimate | The same thing, named more honestly. Some plans prefer this label precisely because it is not an approval | The office | Same as above |
| Preauthorization or prior authorization | Advance approval the plan requires for named services before it will consider payment | The plan's rules | The claim can be denied outright for lack of authorization |
| Precertification | Usually a required advance step, more common language on the medical side and occasionally borrowed | The plan's rules | Depends entirely on the contract; read it |
| Benefit determination | The written response itself, whichever process produced it | The plan | Not applicable |
Two practical consequences. First, if somebody in your office says "we sent it in for approval," that sentence carries no information and should be treated as unfinished. The note has to say which process, which codes, which date. Second, the required-versus-optional question is a plan-level fact you can capture once and reuse for every patient on that group, rather than rediscovering it patient by patient. That belongs in your plan-level notes alongside everything else you gather during benefits verification.
What It Gets You, and What "Approved" Is Not
A written determination is genuinely valuable, and it is valuable for reasons that have little to do with the word approved.
- It is written and dated. Unlike a phone call, it is a document with the plan's name on it, produced by the plan, addressing your specific patient and your specific codes.
- It surfaces the clauses before they cost you. Alternate benefit provisions, replacement intervals, frequency counters, missing tooth language and category classification all show up in the response rather than on an explanation of benefits after the fact. Our piece on alternate benefit clauses covers what those look like when they arrive unannounced.
- It uses history you do not have. The plan knows what it has already paid for this person, including at offices you have never heard of. That is frequently the whole reason to send one.
- It is the strongest single document in an appeal. When a claim is later processed in a way that contradicts the determination, you are no longer arguing from memory.
- It catches your own errors early. A response that comes back confused about a tooth number or a code is telling you something about your submission, cheaply, before the treatment exists.
What it does not do is commit the plan to pay. Every determination carries conditions, and they are not fine print so much as the actual terms of the thing.
A determination assumes the patient is still eligible on the date of service, that the annual maximum has not been consumed by claims from other offices in the meantime, that the final claim matches what was submitted in codes and teeth, that the determination itself has not expired, and that the plan does not later reprocess. Any of those can change without anyone telling you. Say the word "estimate" to patients, not "approval," because the moment a patient hears approved they have heard a promise, and you will be the one explaining why it was not one.
Worth stating plainly for the team: a plan's answer is about benefits, not about care. The plan is saying what it will pay for. Whether treatment is appropriate, and whether it should happen at all, is the treating dentist's judgment and nothing a payer sends changes that. Teams that blur this end up telling patients the insurance company said no to their treatment, which is both wrong and corrosive.
When It Is Worth the Wait, and When It Is a Habit
Every predetermination costs you time in two places: the staff time to assemble and send it, and the calendar time before treatment happens. The second one is the expensive one, because a case that sits is a case that cools.
How long the wait runs varies by payer, by category, by whether attachments were required and by whether the first submission was complete. No published figure will tell you what yours is. Log the send date and the response date for a couple of months and you will have a number for your own payers, which is the only number that helps you decide anything.
| Send one when | Skip it when |
|---|---|
| The plan requires preauthorization for this category | Treatment should not wait, which is the dentist's call and outranks everything in this table |
| The case is large enough that a wrong estimate would be a real problem for this patient | You have verified the plan, you know how it handles this category, and you have the documentation to show it |
| A clause plausibly applies and you cannot confirm the history yourself | The annual maximum is already spent, so the answer is academic |
| This payer routinely challenges this category and you are building the record now | The delay would push the case across a benefit year boundary in a way that costs the patient |
| The patient has asked for something in writing before committing | It is being used to postpone a case presentation conversation |
That last one deserves its own paragraph, because it is the most common invisible reason practices over-send. When a team is not comfortable presenting a case, "let us send it to your insurance first" is a socially acceptable way to end the appointment without asking anyone to decide anything. It feels like diligence. It is avoidance with paperwork. If your unscheduled treatment list is full of cases waiting on determinations that nobody followed up on, that is the pattern, and the fix is in how cases get presented rather than in how they get submitted.
The opposite failure is real too. A practice that never sends one, on the theory that they are slow and not binding anyway, spends its time on appeals instead, which is slower and less pleasant. Our guide to giving patients an accurate treatment estimate covers where the determination sits in the overall order of operations.
What to Attach, and What a Thin Submission Gets You
A thin submission gets you one of two things: a thin answer that is worthless, or a request for the documentation you should have sent the first time, which costs you the entire cycle again. Both are expensive and both are avoidable.
The authority on what to send is the payer, not a general article. Plans publish documentation requirements by procedure category, and they differ, and they change. Get that list in writing for the categories you submit most often, keep it with your plan-level notes, and revisit it when a submission comes back asking for something you did not know about.
Where submissions commonly go wrong
- The codes and the narrative disagree. The reviewer is comparing them. If they describe different things, the submission stalls.
- Tooth numbers, surfaces or quadrants are missing or wrong. The most common purely clerical cause of a useless response.
- Images are not labeled or oriented. An unlabeled image is an image the reviewer cannot use.
- The narrative is boilerplate. The same paragraph sent on every case stops carrying information, and reviewers recognize it. A narrative should state what is already documented in the record for this patient, in plain terms, without arguing.
- The attachment never arrived. Confirm delivery on the clearinghouse or attachment service rather than assuming. This is a surprisingly frequent silent failure.
- It went to the wrong entity. The payer on the card is not always the payer that processes the claim, especially with leased networks and self-funded groups.
What that plan requires, in what format, where it gets sent, and anything that has tripped you up before. Pin it where the person doing submissions works. This is ten minutes of setup per payer and it eliminates the single most expensive pattern in the whole process, which is sending something incomplete and finding out weeks later. The claims and attachments lesson walks through the mechanics of assembling and transmitting them.
Recording the Answer So It Survives Six Weeks
This is the part that actually breaks, and the scene at the top of this article is what it looks like. The determination arrives, somebody reads it, somebody is relieved, and then it goes into a stack. The patient comes back weeks later and is seen by a different person, who has no idea any of this happened.
Design for the handoff, because the person who sent it will not be the person at checkout. Three rules make that work.
What gets captured, every time
- Date sent and date the response arrived, so you learn your own turnaround
- The exact codes, teeth, surfaces or quadrants that were determined, not a summary
- The amounts the plan stated, and every condition it attached
- Any validity window or expiration the plan named
- The reference or determination number
- The scanned response attached to the patient record, not a shared drive
- Whether the treatment plan estimate was updated from it, and by whom
Then attach it where the work lives. The determination belongs on the treatment plan it relates to, with the estimate updated from it, rather than filed as a loose document. If your software supports a visible flag or an alert on the account, use it, because the goal is that the person at checkout stumbles into this information rather than having to go looking for it.
And re-verify before the appointment regardless of what the determination says. A determination is a snapshot of benefits on the day it was issued. Eligibility can change, the maximum can be consumed elsewhere, and the plan can change hands at a renewal. Running the eligibility check again in the days before the visit is a small cost that catches the most expensive surprises. The insurance and revenue cycle chapter covers how these checkpoints fit together across the whole cycle.
Two Conversations You Will Have
Explaining why the office is waiting
When a patient hears "we are waiting for approval," a fair number of them hear "the insurance company is deciding whether I can have this." That is not what is happening and it is worth correcting gently, because the misunderstanding causes resentment that lands on you rather than on the plan.
Say three things. What you sent and why: you asked the plan, in writing, what it will pay, so the number you give them is right the first time. Who decides what: the dentist decides the treatment, the plan decides the benefit, and those are separate questions. And what happens next, with a specific commitment: a name, a date they will hear from you, and what you will do if nothing has arrived by then. The last one matters most. Patients tolerate waiting. They do not tolerate silence.
Explaining a denial that arrives after treatment
It happens even with a determination in hand, for all the reasons listed earlier, and the conversation goes badly when the office leads with the appeal. Lead with what happened.
State plainly what the plan did, without editorializing about the plan. Say what the office is doing about it and who is doing it. Tell the patient what it means for their balance right now, and be honest if the answer is that it depends on how the appeal goes. Then give them a date to expect an update and actually deliver on that date, even if the update is that there is no update. Do not promise the appeal will succeed, and do not tell a patient their insurance denied their treatment, because the plan denied a benefit and the treatment already happened.
Then work the appeal properly, with the determination attached, because a plan that paid contrary to its own written determination is the most winnable appeal there is. Our guide to the most common claim denials and how to prevent them covers the appeal structure, and how to read a dental EOB without guessing covers making sure you have correctly identified what the plan actually did before you argue about it.
THE CHAIRSIDE TAKE
Ask your team one question this week: for our top handful of plans, which categories require preauthorization and which are optional? If nobody can answer without making a call, that is the whole project. Gather it once, write it at the plan level, and stop deciding this patient by patient.
After that, fix the record. Every determination gets a date, the exact codes, the conditions, the reference number and a scan attached to the treatment plan it belongs to. Not a note that says "sent for approval." That single change removes most of the conversations at checkout that start with "I thought this was covered."
The blunt version: a predetermination buys you a written, dated answer from a plan that would otherwise answer you verbally and deniably, and that is worth real money in the cases where it matters. It buys you nothing when you already knew the answer, and it costs you a patient's momentum every time it is used to avoid a conversation somebody did not want to have. If you want the underlying mechanics in order, the free Dental Insurance and Billing course covers plans, coding, claims and appeals in sequence.
Educational content only. It is not legal, financial, tax, or clinical advice. Prices and ranges are approximate and vary by region, condition, and year. Verify current rules with your state dental board and qualified professionals. ChairsideSource is not affiliated with any manufacturer, the ADA, or the DAT.