What is a "never" event?

The reasons for denial of payment is merely being expanded, but not necessarily for things within the control of the physician, nurses, and hospital.

Not paying for surgery on the wrong body part of course would be expected; it was not consented to by the patient, and did not have pre-approval from the insurer.

But they are trying to slip in some things that despite good care can still happen, and indeed, like hypoglycemia are known complications of appropriate care. In all studies of of tight glycemic control, which improves patient outcomes, the treatment group experienced a higher rate of hypoglycemic injury. This is in the tightest of practice under clinical trials, suggesting that even supranormal levels of vigilance cannot reduce all hypoglycemia complications. But in the end, patients are better off with the attempt for tight glycemic control, because the benefits outweigh the risks; even counting the complications against the tight control group, they did better than if only minimal glycemic control (with low rates of hypoglycemia) was used.
But now with the ‘risk’ from hypoglycemia increased beyond the human cost, care will tend toward lesser control, with more complications.
Incentive systems always work; just be careful what you incentivise.

The lawsuit has all the features of a product. It is inherently harmful in its ordinary use. I suggest strict liability apply to all weak cases.

Appellate decision are based on judge errors in the law, not on errors of facts. All reversed decisions are “never events.” The judge should not get paid for any reversed decision.