Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Insurance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee adopts amendment to Senate Bill 480 to tighten documentation and clinical-peer review rules
Summary
The committee approved amendment 6 to Senate Bill 480, adding documentation requirements for unanticipated care, clinical-peer review language aligned with House Bill 103, an annual review rule for chronic-condition plans and portability language for plan changes. The bill passed on a recorded vote.
The committee approved amendment 6 to Senate Bill 480, then voted to pass the bill as amended.
Amendment 6, presented by Doctor Johnson, adds four main changes to the bill: a requirement that providers document why unanticipated care was necessary during an episode; clinical-peer-review language patterned on House Bill 103 to ensure like-for-like specialty reviewers in insurer communications; an annual review requirement for chronic-condition plan design; and language clarifying that a plan need not cover a service when it is not covered under the enrollee’s new plan after switching carriers. "I felt that was very reasonable thing to to ask of the the practitioner so that there's some documentation on the front end," Doctor Johnson said, describing the documentation requirement for unanticipated care.
Doctor Johnson also told the committee the amendment includes a clinical-peer provision: "there's a a like person on the other end, whether it's a physical therapist or a physician or a nurse practitioner, somebody who understands that specialty," language he said was drawn in part from House Bill 103. He said one remaining drafting item relates to section 27, which the sponsors will revisit on second reading to make sure decisions are limited to medical necessity.
On chronic-condition management, the amendment replaces language that would have made certain chronic-condition designations permanent and instead requires an annual review. "We kinda stuck with that year time grama, so it pulls out that chronic condition and resets it to that every year review," Doctor Johnson said, describing the once-per-year review as intended to account for plan changes.
During committee consideration the amendment was accepted by consent. The committee then voted to pass the bill as amended. The roll call recorded twelve affirmative votes with one member excused: Representative Campbell (yes); Representative Dan Chester (yes); Representative Porter (excused); Representative Shackleford (yes); Representative Goss Reeves (yes); Representative Lehman (yes); Representative Barrett (yes); Representative Borders (yes); Representative Mayfield (yes); Representative Maguire (yes); Representative Ledbetter (yes); Representative Snow (yes); Representative Carbaugh (yes). The clerk announced the tally as "12 to 0," and the chair declared the bill passed.
The sponsors said they expect additional, narrowly focused drafting on section 27 on second reading to ensure standards are limited to medical necessity; no final language on that point was adopted at the meeting. The bill will return for subsequent consideration with that drafting change possible.
