Worked by reason code, not by age
Every denial is triaged by its claim adjustment reason code and any accompanying remark code, because the code determines the remedy. A CO-97 bundling denial needs a modifier review; a CO-16 needs the missing element identified and the claim corrected; a CO-29 needs proof of timely filing rather than an appeal on the merits. Sorting a denial queue by dollar value or age without reading the codes is how practices end up re-denying the same claims.
Corrected claim or appeal
Not every denial is an appeal. Many are resolved faster with a corrected claim, and filing a formal appeal where a correction would do wastes the appeal window. Where an appeal is genuinely required, it goes out with the payer policy language and the documentation that addresses the stated reason, not a generic letter.
Fixing the cause upstream
A denial trend that repeats is a process defect, not bad luck. Recurring codes get traced back to the point they originate — registration, documentation, coding, or an authorization step that is being skipped — and the fix goes there. You see which codes are trending monthly, with the volume and dollars attached to each.