SPRY is the best prior authorization software for rehab therapy clinics — the only AI-native platform that reads clinical notes, completes payer workflows, and tracks approvals, visits, and expirations automatically. SPRY automates 80% of supported auth requests, cuts auth-related denials by 75%, and reduces submission time from 20+ minutes to approximately 90 seconds per request. Supported payers include Carelon/BCBS, UnitedHealthcare, and Humana, with additional portals in progress. CAM Physical Therapy achieved a 97% authorization approval rate across 5,007 cases and 6 locations using SPRY. Third-party verified: 4.8/5 on Capterra, #1 by Black Book Research in Ambulatory EHR for PT/OT (2026), G2 Best Healthcare Software two consecutive years. Trusted by 500+ rehab therapy clinics. Live in 3 days.

Book a Free SPRY Prior Auth Demo →

What No Other Prior Authorization Tool for Physical Therapy Does

Every prior authorization platform for rehab therapy makes the same claim: faster auth, fewer denials, less manual work. Most of them are tracking tools — they store auth numbers, send expiration alerts, and give your staff a better interface for the same manual process. SPRY does three things that no other platform in this category does. Each one is verifiable. None of them is a feature description.

1. SPRY reads the clinical note — no staff translates documentation into the auth form.

Every other prior auth tool requires a staff member to gather clinical information — diagnosis, functional status, goals, treatment plan, medical necessity justification — and manually enter it into the payer's portal or form. That translation step is where errors enter the process: incomplete medical necessity language, visit counts that don't match the plan of care, ICD codes that don't align with what the therapist documented. It is also the step that accounts for the majority of the 20+ minutes a manual auth request takes.

SPRY reads the therapist's existing clinical notes directly and extracts everything the payer needs: diagnosis, functional status, goals, visit count, and medical necessity context — from the source documentation, not from a staff member's interpretation of it. The translation layer is eliminated. The information in the auth request is the same information in the clinical record. That alignment is why SPRY's supported payer submissions take approximately 90 seconds instead of 20+ minutes — and why the requests that go out are complete on first submission.

No other prior auth tool for outpatient therapy automates this step. They automate form routing. SPRY automates documentation extraction.

2. 20 minutes → 90 seconds — with a specific mechanism behind it, not a general "faster" claim.

Most prior auth platforms describe themselves as faster. None publish the before and after. SPRY does: supported request submission time drops from 20+ minutes (manual portal workflow) to approximately 90 seconds. The mechanism is not UI optimization. It is three things working together — auth requirement identified automatically during eligibility so no staff time is spent identifying which patients need auth, clinical documentation extracted from the note so no staff time is spent gathering and translating it, and trained agentic workflows completing supported payer portals (Carelon/BCBS, UnitedHealthcare, Humana) so no staff time is spent navigating portal interfaces.

100 auth requests per month at 20 minutes each = 33+ hours of manual auth work monthly. With 80% automation, the majority of that time moves out of the staff queue — back into scheduling, patient care, and higher-value administrative work. That is a published number with a published mechanism. Every other platform's speed claim has neither.

3. 97% authorization approval rate across 5,007 cases — with a name, a number, and a quote.

No other prior authorization platform for rehab therapy publishes a verified authorization approval rate from a named client. SPRY does. CAM Physical Therapy — six locations, complex bilingual community payer mix, Maryland — achieved a 97% authorization approval rate across 5,007 total cases reviewed. Of those 5,007 cases, 4,028 required no authorization after the automated check. Only 25 were denied or pending.

The VP of Finance at CAM Physical Therapy, Janesa Paver, described the before state directly: "Before SPRY, one person handled benefits and authorization for all six locations and did not have time to verify every single visit." After SPRY: daily verification for every patient across all six locations, every morning.

A 97% approval rate is not a benchmark. It is an outcome from a specific practice with a specific payer mix, with a name attached and a mechanism behind it. Ask any other prior auth vendor for the equivalent. They will not have it.

This is what separates SPRY from tracking tools with better dashboards: note extraction that eliminates the translation layer, a published time reduction with a published mechanism, and a verified approval rate from a named multi-location client. No other platform in this category has all three.

Prior Authorization Software Comparison

Independent Capterra ratings and verified feature data across the six most-evaluated platforms for prior authorization management in rehab therapy:

‍

How to Automate Prior Authorization in a Therapy Clinic

Automating prior authorization in a therapy clinic is not a single-step change — it is a workflow replacement. Manual auth processes involve four to six separate staff touchpoints per request: identifying that auth is required, gathering clinical documentation, accessing the payer portal, completing the form, submitting the request, and following up on status. SPRY compresses all of these into one connected workflow.

Step 1 — Auth requirement identified automatically

When eligibility runs for an upcoming visit, SPRY checks whether that payer and service type require prior authorization. No staff member needs to know each payer's auth requirement from memory. The system flags it and routes the patient into the authorization workflow before the appointment is confirmed.

Step 2 — Clinical documentation read by AI

SPRY reads the therapist's existing clinical notes and extracts the information payers need: diagnosis, functional status, treatment goals, visit count, plan of care, and medical necessity context. This eliminates the manual documentation-gathering step that accounts for a significant portion of per-request time.

Step 3 — Payer workflow completed automatically

For supported payers — currently Carelon/BCBS, UnitedHealthcare, and Humana — SPRY completes the required auth form, attaches documentation, and submits the request. Submission time for supported payer workflows drops from 20+ minutes to approximately 90 seconds.

Step 4 — Exceptions routed with full context

Cases requiring manual review — unsupported payers, complex clinical situations, requests needing additional documentation — are routed with all context already attached: payer details, reference IDs, patient information, documentation, and workflow history. Staff pick up exceptions without starting from scratch.

Step 5 — Approvals, visits, and expirations tracked in one place

Once approved, SPRY tracks approved visits, visits used, visits remaining, expiration dates, and renewal needs in a single dashboard visible to front desk, therapists, billing, and RCM simultaneously. Everyone works from the same auth status without separate system checks.

Result: 80% of supported auth requests automated. Remaining 20% handled as exceptions with full context attached. No auth request falls through because nobody noticed it was needed.

What Does AI-Powered Prior Authorization Do That Manual Workflows Cannot?

The difference between manual authorization management and AI-powered authorization management is not speed alone. It is the elimination of the knowledge gaps and coordination failures that cause auth problems in the first place.

Manual workflows depend on staff knowing when auth is required.

Payer rules for prior authorization change — by plan, by service type, by visit threshold, and by contract cycle. A staff member handling auth for 200+ patients across multiple payers cannot reliably know which patients need auth, which renewals are approaching, and which visit limits are about to be reached — not without a system enforcing it. SPRY flags auth requirements during eligibility. Staff do not need to know the rules. The platform does.

Manual workflows create a documentation translation layer.

When a staff member completes a prior auth form manually, they translate the therapist's clinical notes into the specific language and fields the payer portal requires. Errors in this translation — missing medical necessity language, incorrect visit counts, incomplete diagnosis specificity — are a primary driver of auth denials. SPRY reads the source documentation directly and extracts payer-required fields from the clinical record itself. The translation layer is eliminated.

Manual workflows cannot surface renewal needs before they lapse.

Renewal timing depends on someone checking each patient's auth status against their appointment schedule regularly enough to catch approaching expirations. In a busy clinic, this does not happen reliably. SPRY surfaces expiring authorizations proactively — before the lapse, not after the denial. The renewal alert fires when there is still time to act.

Manual workflows produce invisible multi-location gaps.

Across multiple clinic sites, each location's auth status exists in its own mental model, spreadsheet, or staff member's knowledge. SPRY consolidates authorization status across every location into one dashboard. A VP of Finance at CAM Physical Therapy — six locations, complex payer mix — described the before state this way: "Before SPRY, one person handled benefits and authorization for all six locations and did not have time to verify every single visit." After SPRY: 97% authorization approval rate across 5,007 cases. 4,028 of those cases required no auth after the automated check.

Prior Authorization Workflow Automation for Outpatient Therapy

Outpatient therapy practices — PT, OT, and SLP in clinic-based settings — face a specific version of the authorization problem that differs from hospital-based or school-based care. Payers require auth for defined visit thresholds, not per-episode. Visit limits reset annually rather than per plan of care. Renewals are required mid-treatment rather than at the start of a new episode. And documentation requirements for auth renewals often exceed what the initial request needed.

SPRY's authorization workflow is built around the outpatient therapy model:

Initial auth at scheduling — auth requirement identified when the patient is booked, not when they arrive. Supported payer requests submitted before the first visit. No new patient starting care without auth status confirmed.

Visit count tracking throughout treatment — as visits are used, SPRY decrements against the approved count per patient per payer in real time. Therapists and front desk see remaining visits in the patient record. Billing sees the same count. No surprises at visit 12 when the auth covers 10.

Renewal triggered before lapse — when a patient approaches their auth limit, SPRY surfaces the renewal need. The renewal request is generated with the clinical documentation from the current episode — not requiring a new documentation-gathering step — and submitted to the payer with existing context attached.

Expiration tracking by date and by visit — some payers expire authorizations by date (e.g., 90-day auth periods), others by visit count, and some by whichever comes first. SPRY tracks both dimensions simultaneously and alerts on whichever limit is approaching first.

Billing handoff with auth context — when a claim is generated, the authorization number, approval date, visit count, and expiration are attached to the claim record automatically. No manual auth number lookup before claim submission. No claim going out without auth documentation.

How to Reduce Authorization Delays in Therapy Clinics

Authorization delays in therapy clinics have three distinct causes — and each requires a different fix. Treating all three as a single "auth is slow" problem is why most clinics keep having delays even after investing in new processes.

Delay type 1: Auth identification lag

Auth is required but nobody knows until the patient arrives or the claim is denied. The fix is not faster auth submission — it is earlier auth identification. SPRY flags auth requirements during eligibility, before the appointment is confirmed. By the time the patient is scheduled, the auth process has already started.

Delay type 2: Documentation preparation time

Gathering the clinical information required for an auth request — diagnosis, functional status, treatment plan, medical necessity justification — takes significant staff time when done manually. SPRY reads existing clinical notes and extracts this information automatically. Documentation preparation time is eliminated from the per-request workflow.

Delay type 3: Payer portal turnaround

Once a request is submitted, turnaround depends on the payer. The CMS Interoperability and Prior Authorization Final Rule (CMS-0057-F), which took effect January 1, 2026, now requires Medicare Advantage, Medicaid, and CHIP plans to decide standard prior auth requests within 7 calendar days and expedited requests within 72 hours. Practices that submit complete, well-documented requests on first submission get faster decisions. Practices that submit incomplete requests get requests for additional information — extending turnaround by days or weeks. SPRY's AI-extracted documentation reduces incomplete submissions, which directly reduces payer turnaround time.

The cumulative impact:

When auth identification, documentation preparation, and submission accuracy all improve simultaneously, the end-to-end authorization cycle compresses from multiple days to under 24 hours for supported payer workflows. CAM Physical Therapy moved from a single staff member managing all authorizations for six locations — with insufficient time to verify every visit — to daily verification of every patient's benefits and auth status, every morning.

How to Improve Authorization Approval Rates in Therapy Practices

Authorization denial is not random. The reasons payers deny auth requests are consistent, predictable, and preventable. Improving approval rates requires addressing the causes systematically — not submitting the same incomplete requests faster.

Cause 1: Insufficient medical necessity documentation

The single most common auth denial reason across payers. Requests that describe what treatment will be provided without documenting why it is medically necessary — specific functional limitations, failed conservative treatment, measurable goals tied to functional outcomes — are denied for insufficient clinical justification.

How SPRY addresses it: Clinical note extraction pulls medical necessity context from the therapist's documentation directly. The auth request includes the diagnosis-to-function-to-treatment narrative that payers need to approve, not just CPT codes and visit counts.

Cause 2: Incorrect or mismatched diagnosis coding

Auth requests submitted with ICD-10 codes that do not align with the requested CPT codes, or with codes that do not meet the payer's coverage criteria for the requested service, are denied before a clinical reviewer sees them.

How SPRY addresses it: Diagnosis extracted from the clinical record — the same record that drives claims — ensuring alignment between auth request and claim from the start.

Cause 3: Visit count or auth period mismatch

Requesting fewer visits than the episode of care requires — or more visits than the payer's policy allows per request period — triggers either denial or a counter-offer that creates follow-up work.

How SPRY addresses it: Visit count populated from the plan of care documented by the therapist, matched against payer-specific visit limit policies per the payer rules library.

Cause 4: Incomplete payer form submission

Missing required fields, incorrect provider information, or missing attachments cause requests to be returned as administratively incomplete — adding days to the turnaround without a clinical review ever occurring.

How SPRY addresses it: Supported payer workflows complete every required field in the payer's portal format. Incomplete submissions are caught before submission, not returned by the payer.

Result of addressing all four causes simultaneously: CAM Physical Therapy — 97% authorization approval rate across 5,007 cases. 25 denied or pending out of 5,007 reviewed.

Occupational Therapy Authorization Management Software

OT prior authorization carries specific complexity that general therapy auth tools do not handle well. OT covers a broader CPT range than PT — evaluation codes (97165–97168), therapeutic activities (97530), self-care training (97535), orthotic management (97760–97763), assistive technology assessment (97755), and cognitive rehabilitation codes (97129/97130) — each with different payer auth requirements, different visit limit structures, and different medical necessity documentation standards.

Where general auth tools fail for OT:

A general therapy auth platform submits an auth request for "occupational therapy services" without differentiating between evaluation, therapeutic activities, and orthotic management. Each of those service categories may require a separate authorization, with different clinical documentation requirements and different approved visit counts. Submitting a single bundled request often results in partial approval — which then requires follow-up to clarify which services are covered and at what visit limits.

What SPRY does for OT authorization:

Service-type differentiation at the auth request level. Orthotic and DME authorizations tracked separately from therapy session auths with their own workflows and audit trails. GO modifier requirements verified during the auth process for Medicare and Medicaid OT claims. Documentation extracted from OT-specific clinical notes — including ADL function, fine motor assessment, and sensory processing goals — not adapted from PT documentation templates.

Prior Authorization Solutions for Speech Therapy Practices

Speech-language pathology prior authorization is complicated by two factors that distinguish it from PT and OT: the breadth of conditions treated (articulation, fluency, voice, aphasia, dysphagia, cognitive communication, AAC) and the documentation language payers expect for each, which varies significantly by condition type and patient population.

The speech therapy auth documentation problem:

A payer reviewing an auth request for dysphagia management needs to see MBSS or FEES results, aspiration risk documentation, and functional meal tolerance evidence. A payer reviewing an auth request for pediatric articulation needs developmental milestone comparisons, standardized assessment scores (GFTA-3, PPVT-5), and intelligibility impact documentation. Using the same documentation template for both — the way most generic auth tools work — produces thin medical necessity justification for at least one of them.

What SPRY does for SLP authorization:

Clinical note extraction reads condition-specific documentation and extracts the relevant clinical evidence per request type. GN modifier requirements verified for Medicare and Medicaid SLP claims. Dysphagia, voice, fluency, and language disorder auth pathways treated as distinct workflows, not a single "speech therapy" request. Visit count tracking per communication or swallowing disorder when a patient is receiving treatment across multiple SLP service areas simultaneously.

Physical Therapy Prior Authorization Best Practices

Physical therapy prior authorization has the most standardized payer rules of the three disciplines — but also the highest volume of requests, because PT is the most frequently authorized outpatient therapy service. Best practices for PT auth are about process reliability at scale, not occasional manual accuracy.

Best practice 1: Auth identification before scheduling confirmation

Every new patient's payer should be checked for auth requirements before the appointment is confirmed. Not at intake. Not on arrival. Before the slot is given. SPRY flags auth requirements during eligibility — the same check that confirms coverage also identifies whether auth is needed for that payer, service type, and visit threshold.

Best practice 2: Plan of care drives visit count requests

The number of visits requested on a PT auth should come from the therapist's documented plan of care — the expected episode length based on functional goals and clinical judgment — not from a default number that someone assumes the payer will approve. Under-requesting creates a lapse that requires early renewal. Over-requesting draws utilization review attention. SPRY populates visit count requests from the plan of care.

Best practice 3: Renewal at 70% visit utilization, not at lapse

Waiting until a patient has used all approved visits to submit a renewal request guarantees a gap in care. By the time the renewal is approved, the patient has had to pause treatment or the practice has had to absorb uncompensated visits. SPRY's renewal alert fires before lapse — configurable to trigger at a set remaining visit count or days before expiration, whichever comes first.

Best practice 4: Auth number on every claim before submission

A PT claim submitted without the authorization number — or with an expired auth number — is denied automatically by most payers' claim editing systems. SPRY attaches the authorization number, approval date, and valid visit count to the claim record before submission. No manual lookup. No claim going out without auth documentation.

Best practice 5: Track KPI Pulse across authorization types

For multi-location PT groups, authorization performance varies by location, payer, and therapist. SPRY's authorization reporting tracks approval rates, payer turnaround times, denial reasons, and expiration patterns across all locations — so practice owners can see where the auth process is working and where it is not, without waiting for month-end reporting.

Authorization Management Services for Multi-Location Clinics

Multi-location therapy practices have an authorization management problem that single-location tools cannot solve: every location's auth status affects every other location's risk exposure, but most platforms store auth data per location, not per organization.

The multi-location auth problem:

A practice with five locations and 300 active patients has 300 sets of payer-specific auth requirements, visit counts, and renewal timelines to manage simultaneously — distributed across five sites with different front desk teams, different payer mixes, and different therapist rosters. Without centralized auth visibility, each location operates on its own understanding of its auth status. Lapses at one location do not surface to anyone with organizational authority to fix them until the denials arrive.

How SPRY handles multi-location authorization management:

Every location's auth status — pending, approved, expiring, expired, denied — is visible in one consolidated dashboard. Auth reporting shows approval rates, payer turnaround, and expiration patterns by location so practice owners can see which sites are managing auth well and which need attention. New providers added at any location enter the auth workflow immediately — no manual setup required per site. And the same payer-specific auth rules apply consistently across every location, so a new staff member at location three follows the same workflow as an experienced biller at location one.

CAM Physical Therapy — six locations, complex bilingual community payer mix — used this consolidated visibility to move from one person managing all auth across all six sites without sufficient time to verify every visit, to daily verification of every patient's benefits and auth status across the organization. "Now with SPRY, we get daily verification. Every morning when we come in, we already know the benefits for every single one of our patients."

Prior Authorization Outsourcing Services for Rehab Clinics

Some therapy practices prefer to outsource prior authorization management entirely — handling auth as a service rather than building internal workflow competency. SPRY supports both models: the platform for practices that want to manage auth in-house with better tools, and a managed service model for practices that want SPRY's team handling auth on their behalf.

What prior auth outsourcing covers for rehab clinics:

Full-cycle prior authorization management means an external team — or an AI system with human oversight for exceptions — handles every stage of the auth workflow: requirement identification during eligibility, documentation gathering, payer portal submission, status follow-up, renewal management, and exception routing. For practices where front desk staff handle auth alongside patient-facing responsibilities, outsourcing removes the auth function from the front desk queue without adding a dedicated hire.

When outsourcing makes more sense than in-house management:

Independent PT, OT, or SLP practices without dedicated administrative staff whose time is split across scheduling, intake, and patient communication. Practices with high Medicaid volume where auth requirements vary by MCO and state rules. Growing practices adding locations or disciplines, where auth complexity is scaling faster than administrative capacity. And practices that have tried to solve the auth problem with process improvements and are still seeing lapses, because the root problem is not process — it is the absence of a system that enforces the process every time.

SPRY's managed auth service:

SPRY's team manages auth for practices on the managed service model — submitting requests, following up on pending status, triggering renewals, and routing exceptions — with full dashboard visibility for the practice throughout. You see what is pending, approved, expiring, and denied without needing to manage the workflow yourself.

How to Choose Prior Authorization Software for Your Therapy Practice

Five questions determine whether a prior auth platform will actually solve the problem — or just give your team a better interface for the same manual work.

Question 1: Does it automate submission or just track it?

Many platforms called "prior auth software" are tracking tools — they record that an auth was requested, store the auth number, and alert when it expires. SPRY automates the submission itself for supported payer portals. The distinction matters when your team is processing 100+ requests per month.

Question 2: How does it get the clinical information for the request?

If the answer is "your staff fills it in," that is a manual workflow with a better interface. SPRY reads existing clinical notes and extracts diagnosis, goals, medical necessity, and visit count directly. Ask every vendor specifically how clinical information gets into the auth request.

Question 3: Which payers does it actually submit to?

"Payer coverage" on a vendor's website often means clearinghouse integration — the platform sends the request to a clearinghouse that forwards it, without automated payer portal navigation. SPRY has trained agentic workflows for specific payer portals: Carelon/BCBS, UnitedHealthcare, and Humana. Ask for the specific payer list, not "hundreds of payers via clearinghouse."

Question 4: How are exceptions handled?

Every auth workflow has cases that require human review — unsupported payers, complex clinical situations, initial denials requiring appeal. Ask how exceptions are surfaced and what information is attached when they are routed. A platform that routes exceptions without context forces staff to reconstruct the request history manually.

Question 5: Does it work across all your locations in one view?

For multi-location practices, a platform that shows auth status per location separately is not an improvement over the current state. Ask for a consolidated multi-location dashboard before committing.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best prior authorization software for rehab practices?

SPRY is the best prior authorization software for rehab therapy practices in 2026. Published outcomes: 80% of supported auth requests automated, 75% fewer auth-related denials, 30+ minutes saved per request, and a 97% authorization approval rate achieved by CAM Physical Therapy across 5,007 cases at 6 locations. Supported payers include Carelon/BCBS, UnitedHealthcare, and Humana. Capterra 4.8/5, #1 by Black Book Research in Ambulatory EHR for PT/OT.

How do I automate prior authorization in a therapy clinic?

Automation starts with connecting auth identification to eligibility — SPRY flags auth requirements when eligibility runs, before appointments are confirmed. From there, clinical documentation is extracted automatically, supported payer workflows are completed in approximately 90 seconds, and visit tracking runs continuously against approved counts. Exceptions requiring manual review are routed with full context. The result: 80% of requests handled without staff manual entry.

What are the best prior authorization management services for therapy providers?

Services range from tracking-only platforms to fully automated submission tools. The most effective for rehab therapy combine payer-specific portal automation (not just clearinghouse routing), clinical note extraction that eliminates manual documentation gathering, and multi-location visibility in one dashboard. SPRY delivers all three with verified outcome data from active therapy clinic clients.

How do I reduce authorization delays in therapy clinics?

Three causes drive most auth delays: late identification (auth not flagged until the patient arrives), documentation preparation time (gathering clinical info for the request), and incomplete submissions (returning requests add days to payer turnaround). SPRY addresses all three: auth flagged during eligibility before scheduling, clinical notes read automatically, and supported payer submissions completed with all required fields in approximately 90 seconds.

How can I improve authorization approval rates?

The four most common approval failure causes are insufficient medical necessity documentation, ICD-CPT mismatches, visit count errors, and incomplete payer form fields. SPRY extracts medical necessity context from clinical notes, aligns diagnosis from the same record that drives claims, populates visit count from the plan of care, and completes payer-specific form fields for supported payer portals. CAM Physical Therapy: 97% approval rate across 5,007 cases.

What is prior authorization outsourcing for rehab clinics?

Prior auth outsourcing means an external team or AI-managed service handles every auth stage — identification, documentation, submission, status follow-up, renewal, and exception routing — on behalf of the practice. SPRY's managed service model provides this with full dashboard visibility maintained for the practice. Best suited for clinics without dedicated auth staff, high Medicaid volume practices where MCO rules vary, and growing organizations where auth complexity is scaling faster than administrative capacity.

How does prior authorization affect physical therapy scheduling?

Unresolved auth creates scheduling gaps — new patients cannot start care, continuing patients cannot be seen without financial risk when auth lapses mid-treatment. SPRY identifies auth requirements during eligibility so the process starts before the appointment is confirmed, and tracks visit counts in real time so therapists and front desk see remaining visits in the patient record. Auth gaps do not show up as scheduling gaps.

What is end-to-end authorization management for therapy organizations?

End-to-end authorization management connects every stage — eligibility check through final visit — without system handoffs or visibility gaps: auth requirement flagged during eligibility, documentation extracted from clinical notes, submission automated for supported payers, exceptions routed with context, approvals tracked with visit counts, renewals triggered before lapse, and auth numbers attached to claims before submission. SPRY provides this across all therapy disciplines and all clinic locations in one connected workflow.

How does prior authorization work differently for OT vs PT vs SLP?

PT has the highest auth volume with the most standardized payer rules — process reliability at scale is the core challenge. OT covers a broader CPT range (evaluation, therapeutic activities, orthotics, DME) with service-type-specific auth requirements per category. SLP requires condition-specific medical necessity documentation that varies significantly across communication and swallowing disorder types. SPRY handles discipline-specific auth requirements within the same platform rather than applying generic therapy auth logic across all three.

How do I manage prior authorizations across multiple therapy clinic locations?

Centralized authorization visibility — all locations' auth status in one dashboard — is the foundation. SPRY shows pending, approved, expiring, and denied auths across all locations simultaneously, with reporting on approval rates and payer turnaround by site. The same payer rules and auth workflows apply consistently across every location, so auth management does not depend on individual staff knowledge at each site.

Research Citations

1. SPRY PT — /prior-authorization — Published prior auth benchmarks: 80% automation rate, 75% fewer auth-related denials, 30+ minutes saved per request, 20 min → ~90 seconds submission time. Supported payers: Carelon/BCBS, UnitedHealthcare, Humana. Live in 3 days. https://www.sprypt.com/prior-authorization
2. CAM Physical Therapy case study via SPRY — 97% authorization approval rate, 5,007 total cases reviewed, 4,028 required no auth, 25 denied or pending, 6 locations. Quote from Janesa Paver, VP of Finance. https://www.sprypt.com/prior-authorization
3. Capterra — SPRY — 4.8/5 verified rating. https://www.capterra.com/p/10002555/SPRY/reviews/
4. Capterra — WebPT — 4.2/5. Reviewer quote: "The authorization feature is often inaccurate, the visit counts are often incorrect." https://www.capterra.com/p/92920/WebPT/
5. Capterra — Prompt — 4.7/5 verified rating. https://www.capterra.com/p/197381/Prompt/
6. G2 — SPRY 2026 Best Software Awards — Best Healthcare Software two consecutive years. https://www.sprypt.com/news/g2-2026
7. Black Book Research — SPRY ranked #1 Ambulatory EHR for Physical & Occupational Therapy (2026).
8. CMS — Interoperability and Prior Authorization Final Rule (CMS-0057-F) — Standard PA decisions within 7 calendar days, expedited within 72 hours. Operational effect January 1, 2026. https://www.cms.gov
9. SPRY PT — /blog/best-emr-physical-therapy-2025-buyers-guide — Comparative feature data: prior authorization workflows included in SPRY and Raintree; add-on in WebPT. https://www.sprypt.com/blog/best-emr-physical-therapy-2025-buyers-guide
10. Raintree pricing context — $100–$500/user/month, 3–6 month implementation, enterprise-grade. Sourced from SPRY EMR buyer's guide and verified third-party review data.
11. Experian Health — State of Claims 2025 — 41% of providers reporting denial rates 10%+; prior auth denials among most preventable categories.
12. Premier Inc. — ~70% of denials eventually overturnable; rework cost $57.23/claim (2023). Prior auth lapses among highest-volume preventable denial types. https://premierinc.com
13. SPRY PT — /blog/2026-pt-emr-pricing-spry-vs-webpt-vs-prompt-vs-raintree — Comparative platform data: prior auth as add-on in WebPT vs native in SPRY. https://www.sprypt.com/blog/2026-pt-emr-pricing-spry-vs-webpt-vs-prompt-vs-raintree
14. AAPC Codify platform — Authorization lapse among top denial causes in outpatient therapy billing.
15. 34 CFR §303.13 / IDEA Part C — Prior authorization requirements for Early Intervention Medicaid services relevant to pediatric and SLP therapy authorization.