Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Healthcare Coverage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs bill to require insurers to cover continuous glucose monitors earlier for some patients
Summary
House Bill 947 would require coverage of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) for medically necessary cases before patients advance to insulin therapy, a move sponsors and several informational witnesses argued could save money and improve care; insurers present signaled no state defrayal liability.
Representative Fiona Nave introduced HB947, which would require insurers to cover continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) for eligible type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients when medically necessary rather than waiting until the patient is insulin-dependent. Nave described CGMs as a tool that samples glucose every five minutes, provides alarms for highs and lows, and yields data that can reduce hospitalizations and improve long-term outcomes.
Sponsor materials contrasted CGM costs (a three-pack of sensors for about $150 that lasts 30 days) against the high annual out-of-pocket costs of some insulin products or GLP medications. Sponsor testimony included personal experience and a fiscal-illustration handout arguing CGM use could reduce overall diabetes-related spending for both patients and payers.
Drew Chuck, an informational witness representing a major payer, said the bill was narrowed to medically necessary type 1 and type 2 diabetes cases and that payers’ policies already vary; he said the bill would not create defrayal obligations for the state under the current language. Committee members pressed on fiscal history; sponsor and witnesses noted that the bill differs from prior sessions (when a fiscal note was large) because costs have fallen and Medicare guidance has shifted.
Outcome: The committee voted to advance HB947 to the House floor.
