High-Volume Prior Authorization Submission

Work a queue of prior authorizations across regional and national health-plan portals, one case at a time, each with its own confirmation number and audit trail. At forty a day the failure mode is the easy case that got skipped, not the hard one.

Go-live in as little as 30 minBrowser agentCustomer portal login

See it run on your systems.

We map your process, volume, and exception paths, then recommend a practical first scope.

Scope this workflow See how it works ↓

Building internally? Read the docs →

How Asteroid runs this workflow

A queue of authorizations, cleared one auditable case at a time

A validated batch of PA cases arrives, Asteroid works it case by case across your plan portals with per-case confirmation numbers, and the results land back with an exception list, and any case a portal disputes escalates to a person while the rest of the queue keeps moving.

Health-plan portals

How it actually runs

01Take the next case from your worklist, with member, provider, and service details as inputs.
02Sign in to that plan’s portal with credentials from an agent profile.
03Submit the authorization and attach documentation, from the case’s inputs only. A missing field fails that case by name.
04Record the confirmation number and status against the case.
05Move to the next case. A failed case is reported and isolated; it never stops the queue.

Anything a portal disputes, from an eligibility mismatch to a clinical question, escalates that single case to a person while the rest of the queue keeps moving.

A validated batch of prior-authorization cases is ready in your worklist

Results back against your worklist
Batch-level results write back case by case: confirmation numbers, statuses, the blockers, and an exception queue with reasons attached.

One case the portal disputes: That single case returns with the portal's dispute attached (an eligibility mismatch or clinical question), and a person clears it once while the rest of the queue keeps moving.

There’s no such thing as a batch. There are 400 individual authorizations.

Portals don’t accept batches; they accept one authorization at a time, and every shortcut people invent under volume pressure, copied fields, assumed answers, skipped confirmations, is a per-case error multiplied by the queue. Agents scale the honest version instead: per-case discipline, per-case audit trail, throughput that grows by running more agents rather than hiring more people to be careful faster.

At scale

What runs today

The per-case submission running in production on payer portals is the unit this queue is made of; the high-volume harness around it is built per plan mix, on request. Scope it against your volumes, or start from the prior authorization workflow library.

Book a demo, see a PA queue worked live

Questions

Frequently asked questions

The per-case unit (sign in, submit, attach, capture the confirmation number) is the standard part; the high-volume harness around it is built per plan mix. Your worklist format defines the intake (member, provider, service details per case), your plan portals define which agents run, and the confirmation number and status are recorded against each case in your queue's shape. Failure isolation and escalation routing follow your review process. Staff stop clicking portals and start working only the exceptions; scoping against your volumes sets the rest.

One credentialed portal account per health plan, each held in an agent profile. The agent signs in to that case's plan portal, so credentials stay scoped per portal and can be rotated or revoked plan by plan. Cases arrive from your worklist with member, provider, and service details; confirmation numbers and statuses are written back against each case. No plan APIs are needed: this workflow exists for the portals that don't offer one. Attachments come from each case's inputs. Security posture, including PHI handling, is on the security page.

It stops that case, and only that case. A missing field fails the case by name before submission; an eligibility mismatch or a clinical question the inputs don't answer escalates that single case to a person with the portal's dispute attached. The agent never fills a clinical gap itself. The failed case is reported and isolated while the rest of the queue keeps moving, which is the design point: at volume, the dangerous failure is the one that silently takes the batch with it. Portal or login changes surface the same way, as isolated, reported exceptions.

Because there is no batch: only individual authorizations, each run as its own agent execution with its own audit trail. Every case records a confirmation number and status against its worklist row, so a skipped row or mixed-up member is visible as a case without evidence, not a hunch. Completed runs are distinct from business exceptions: a portal dispute escalated to staff is a correctly handled case, not a miss. No copied fields, assumed answers, or skipped confirmations: the shortcuts volume pressure invents are structurally impossible per run.

Not the workflow: concurrency is a configuration choice. Each case runs as its own agent execution, so the queue is worked in parallel up to whatever rate the portal and your review process support. In practice the binding constraints are per-plan: what a given portal tolerates, and how fast your staff can clear the exceptions that escalate: the eligibility mismatches and clinical questions that need a person. Throughput grows by running more agents against the same worklist, not by hiring more people to be careful faster.

One case, one run, one confirmation number: the agent takes the next case from your worklist, submits on that plan's portal, and records the confirmation number and status against that specific case before moving on, so a case with evidence attached is visibly done and never re-worked. A case that fails (a named missing field, a portal dispute, a clinical question) is reported and isolated immediately rather than left ambiguous, and it never stops the queue. The blocked cases are exactly the ones sitting in your exception list with their reasons attached.

Book a demo Map this workflow

Disclaimer

Third-party names, including government agencies and registries, are used only to identify systems commonly involved in healthcare operations workflows. Asteroid is not affiliated with, endorsed by, sponsored by, or certified by those third parties unless expressly stated. Workflow availability depends on customer authorization, account permissions, configuration, and applicable system terms.

High-Volume Prior Authorization Submission

See it run on your systems.

A queue of authorizations, cleared one auditable case at a time

There’s no such thing as a batch. There are 400 individual authorizations.

What runs today

Frequently asked questions

Our queue and plan mix are ours. What gets built versus what's already standard?

What access does a multi-plan PA queue require?

What happens when one case in the batch goes wrong?

At hundreds of cases, how do we verify nothing was skipped or mixed up?

What actually limits throughput: credentials, portal concurrency, payer rules, or review capacity?

How does the queue prevent duplicate submissions and surface the cases blocking the batch?