Midweek Update

ACA

Midweek Update

David Ermer–ACA, HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules, U.S. Healthcare–
Photo by Michele Orallo on Unsplash

On Monday of this week, the FEHBlog carefully was reading through Division BB of the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2021, Pub. L. No.  116-260, and he discovered to his great surprise that the new law adds a new subsection 8902(p) to the FEHB Act. Division BB, Section 102(d)(1) found at page 1616 of the enrolled bill version of H.R. 133.

The FEHBlog was surprised because Division BB like virtually every federal healthcare mandate for the past 25 to 30 years has taken the shortcut of reaching all health plans and providers by amending the Public Health Service Act (“PHSA”), ERISA, and the Internal Revenue. However, in two laws passed in 2020, the CARES Act and Division BB, Congress expressly has amended the FEHB Act too.

This new FEHBA Section 8902(p) applies the No Surprises Act and a patient rights provision (Public Health Service Act (“PHSA”) Section 2799A-1,-2, -7)) contractually to FEHB plan carriers and statutorily to the health care providers who serve FEHB plan members. This means that several of the Division BB provisions about which the FEHBlog has expressed concern, e.g. the continuity of care provision (PHSA Section 2799A-3) and the provider directory provision (PHSA Section 2799A-5) do not apply to FEHB plans. You may recall that the FEHBlog expressed concern about the continuity of care provision because the FEHBP has offered transitional care to it members for over 20 years. Why upset the apple cart?

In any event, the No Surprises law will be a real bear to implement and administer. What’s more, Becker’s Hospital News reports that “The arbitration system implemented by New Jersey in 2018 to resolve surprise billing disputes between insurers and out-of-network providers is advantageous to hospitals and other providers, according to a study published Jan. 5 in Health Affairs.”

1. The authors found that providers won 59 percent of arbitration decisions, and health plans won in 41 percent of decisions in the study period.

2. The average arbitration awards were considerably higher than typical in-network payment amounts. The average award was $7,222. This payment award is nine times higher than the median in-network price for the rendered service.

The FEHBlog was intrigued to read this morning about Optum’s acquisition of one of the largest healthcare clearinghouses in the country, Change Healthcare. Assuming timely shareholder and regulatory approvals, the deal is expected to close in the second half of this year. Interestingly, “Neil de Crescenzo, President and CEO of Change Healthcare * * * will serve as OptumInsight’s chief executive officer, leading the combined organization.”

Becker’s Hospital Review lists fourteen health systems with strong balance sheets. Becker’s cautions that “This is not an exhaustive list. Hospital and health system names were compiled from credit rating reports and are listed in alphabetical order.” Nevertheless it’s worth a gander.

The Department of Health and Human Services announced today the launch of

the HPV VAX NOW campaign with the long-term goal of increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates among young adults ages 18–26. The campaign will specifically target young adults and healthcare providers in Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas — states with some of the lowest HPV vaccination rates in the country.

Currently, fewer than half of young adults in the United States have received one or more doses of the HPV vaccine, and only 22% have completed the vaccine series. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), HPV causes nearly 36,000 cases of cancer in men and women each year in the U.S.  

HPV VAX NOW aligns with the OASH immunization “Catch-up to Get Ahead” campaign as part of HHS’ efforts to improve vaccination uptake in the United States. “With the increased awareness of vaccination opportunities that HHS has prioritized during the COVID pandemic, now is an important time for young adults to complete their HPV vaccine series.” said Dorothy Fink, M.D., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Women’s Health.

The HPV VAX NOW campaign is launching during Cervical Cancer Awareness Month, bringing attention to one of the six cancers and pre-cancerous cervical lesions that the HPV vaccine prevents.

The federal government’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency released a joint statement yesterday from the FBI, CISA, the Office of the National Intelligence Director and the National Security Agency about the status of their work on investigating and remediating the SolarWinds backdoor hack. The statement explains each agency’s role in this work.

Tuesday Tidbits

David Ermer–ACA, COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccine, OPM, U.S. Healthcare–
Photo by Patrick Fore on Unsplash

STAT News reports that “Nancy Messonnier, a top federal health official involved in the distribution of Covid-19 vaccines, predicted on Tuesday [in an interview with STAT] that delays in the administration of the shots would improve soon.” (On the bright side, the CDC has begun to update its COVID-19 vaccinations site daily. Around 275,000 initial doses were administered yesterday.) Furthermore

During the discussion Tuesday, Messonnier said she hoped the supply of vaccine would expand greatly in the spring, a time when the shots could be made more widely available to the general public, not just people with certain jobs or health conditions. But making the vaccine is only one step: successfully inoculating the vast majority of the population will require major efforts to educate the public, to build out accessible sites where people can easily get vaccinated, and to ensure individual people show up when it’s their turn to get the shot.

Health Payer Intelligence updates on how three large payers “extended temporary COVID-19 benefits in 2021.” Technically the COVID-19 public health emergency period expires on January 21, 2021, but unquestionably the federal government will extend that period for another 90 days before then.

Under the Affordable Care Act, effective January 1, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force A and B recommendations made two years earlier become eligible for health plan in-network coverage with no member cost-sharing. If you pick out from the USPSTF list those recommendations that received an A or B grade in 2019, you will find ten recommendations that are eligible for “no additional cost” coverage in 2021. Fierce Healthcare provides insights into how health plan members can take advantage of one of those 2019 recommendations -“The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with effective antiretroviral therapy to persons who are at high risk of HIV acquisition.”

On the OPM front, Federal News Network lets us know that

Federal employees who forfeited vacation time in excess of the usual annual leave carryover limit at the end of 2020 may be able to get some of those days back for use later this year, thanks to a policy in the new annual defense authorization law. The Office of Personnel Management on Tuesday issued detailed guidance covering the new annual leave policy and instructed agencies to implement it.

On the mergers and acquisitions front —

  • Fierce Healthcare reports that “Harvard Pilgrim Health Care and Tufts Health Plan officially combined Jan. 1. The deal, announced in August 2019, comes about a decade after the organizations attempted to merge in 2011. * * * The combined Massachusetts organization will serve 2.4 million members. Both the Tufts and Harvard Pilgrim brands will be in the market for a period of time, the organizations said.”
  • Healthcare Dive reports that health insurer “Centene has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Phoenix, Arizona-based Magellan Health for $2.2 billion, or $95 per share, the payer said Monday. Magellan will operate independently under the Centene umbrella. Executives said the combination will result in one of the nation’s largest behavioral health platforms as the two will provide behavioral services to about 41 million members in the U.S. The deal also boosts Centene’s already established footprint in government sponsored health plans with the addition of 5.5 million lives and another 2.2 million to add to its pharmacy benefit management platform.

Midweek update

David Ermer–ACA, Congress, HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules, U.S. Healthcare–
Photo by Manasvita S on Unsplash

Per the Office of Personnel Management, “The effective date of the Open Season change is the first day of the first full pay period in January. For annuitants this date will always be January 1.” It turns out that Sunday January 3, 2021, is the first day of the first full pay period in January 2021. How convenient.

The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, does include the three standard FEHBP appropriations provisions — a prohibition on applying full Cost Accounting Standards coverage to FEHB contracts (Sec. 611), an abortion coverage restriction (Secs. 613, 614), and a limited contraceptive coverage mandate (Sec. 726) which the Affordable Care Act has overridden. What’s more this new law extends the option of FEHBP and FEGLI coverage to 120 tribal grant schools thereby filling a coverage gap erroneously created by the Affordable Care Act. This option is exercised by the tribal employers who must make the minimum federal civil servant government contribution toward the benefit coverage.

For the past 20 years or so, the FEHBP has offered plan members transitional care protection pursuant to President Clinton’s Bill of Consumer Rights which states in pertinent part as follows:

Consumers who are undergoing a course of treatment for a chronic or disabling condition (or who are in the second or third trimester of a pregnancy) at the time they involuntarily change health plans or at a time when a provider is terminated by a plan for other than cause should be able to continue seeing their current specialty providers for up to 90 days (or through completion of postpartum care) to allow for transition of care.

FEHB plan carriers intending to terminate a network provider for cause generally could comply with this requirement by giving affected members 90 days advance notice of the change.

It turns out that Section 113 Division BB of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, includes an Affordable Care Act amendment ensuring continuity of care. The requirements of this new law bear similarities to the FEHBP’s transitional care protections. However, as always, the devil is in the details. For example, the new law’s transitional care provisions apply to any provider contract termination, including passive non-renewals, whether triggered by the provider or the payer, with the limited exception of payer termination for fraud or failure to meet applicable quality standards. FEHB plans and OPM have a year to sort out the details before the new requirements take effect on January 1, 2022.

In other news —

The Senate moved forward today on overriding President’s veto of the FY 2021 National Defense Authorization Act but not on the $2000 COVID-19 relief direct stipend per the Wall Street Journal:

Moving through the procedural steps for overriding Mr. Trump’s veto of the National Defense Authorization Act could take up much of the Senate’s time before Sunday. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.), in a push for a stand-alone vote on increasing the size of the direct checks, has stopped Mr. McConnell from fast-tracking votes on the NDAA override. As a result, the final vote on the NDAA may not take place until Saturday due to a series of procedural steps.

The Senate took one of those steps late Wednesday, voting 80-12 to move forward with the bill, in another show of broad, bipartisan support for the legislation Mr. Trump vetoed.

Bleeping Computer updated us on how the federal government is addressing the SolarWinds backdoor hack.

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has ordered all US federal agencies to update the SolarWinds Orion platform to the latest version by the end of business hours on December 31, 2020. CISA’s Supplemental Guidance to Emergency Directive 21-01 demands this from all agencies using Orion versions unaffected in the SolarWinds supply chain attack.

Monday Roundup

David Ermer–ACA, Congress, U.S. Healthcare, Uncategorized–
Photo by Sven Read on Unsplash

Today, the House of Representatives voted 322-87 to override the President’s veto of the Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. Govexec notes that “The NDAA contains several provisions for federal employees, such as making technical corrections to the paid parental leave policy from last year’s bill and waiving the normal annual cap for unused leave from year to year.” The Senate is expected to complete the veto action in a vote tomorrow. This would be the first time that Congress has overridden one of President Trump’s vetoes.

The House of Representatives also voted in favor of a “clean bill” to amend the latest COVID-19 relief law (H.R. 133) by increasing the direct stipend from $600 to $2000 per person. That bill now goes to the Senate.

The FEHBlog noted earlier this month that the American Hospital Association had asked Congress not to disrupt payer / provider network contracting in the COVID-19 relief bill. Of course, the surprise billing restrictions may encourage in-network providers to make the jump to out-of-network status particularly if the surprise billing arbitration decisions favor the providers. Time will tell on that one, but the following ACA amendment in H.R. 133 reminded the FEHBlog of the AHA’s warning.

Division BB, SEC. 108. IMPLEMENTING PROTECTIONS AGAINST PROVIDER DISCRIMINATION.

Not later than January 1, 2022, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of Labor, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall issue a proposed rule implementing the protections of section 2706(a) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-5(a)). The Secretaries shall accept and consider public comments on any proposed rule issued pursuant to this subsection for a period of 60 days after the date of such issuance. Not later than 6 months after the date of the conclusion of the comment period, the Secretaries shall issue a final rule implementing the protections of section 2706(a) of the Public Health Service Act

Congress has set the fuse on another one of the Affordable Care Act’s time bombs directed at provider networks. Section 2706(a) reads as follows:

A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall not discriminate with respect to participation under the plan or coverage against any health care provider who is acting within the scope of that provider’s license or certification under applicable State law. This section shall not require that a group health plan or health insurance issuer contract with any health care provider willing to abide by the terms and conditions for participation established by the plan or issuer. Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing a group health plan, a health insurance issuer, or the Secretary from establishing varying reimbursement rates based on quality or performance measures.

The Obama Administration on April 29, 2013, issued the following ACA FAQ on this law:

Q2:  Will the Departments be issuing regulations addressing PHS Act section 2706(a) prior to its effective date?

No.  The statutory language of PHS Act section 2706(a) is self-implementing and the Departments do not expect to issue regulations in the near future.  PHS Act section 2706(a) is applicable to non-grandfathered group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance coverage for plan years (in the individual market, policy years) beginning on or after January 1, 2014. 

Until any further guidance is issued, group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual coverage are expected to implement the requirements of PHS Act section 2706(a) using a good faith, reasonable interpretation of the law.  For this purpose, to the extent an item or service is a covered benefit under the plan or coverage, and consistent with reasonable medical management techniques specified under the plan with respect to the frequency, method, treatment or setting for an item or service, a plan or issuer shall not discriminate based on a provider’s license or certification, to the extent the provider is acting within the scope of the provider’s license or certification under applicable state law.  This provision does not require plans or issuers to accept all types of providers into a network.  This provision also does not govern provider reimbursement rates, which may be subject to quality, performance, or market standards and considerations.

The Departments will work together with employers, plans, issuers, states, providers, and other stakeholders to help them come into compliance with the provider nondiscrimination provision and will work with families and individuals to help them understand the law and benefit from it as intended. 

The FEHBlog recalls that ancillary providers such as chiropractors were particularly exercised by, and insurers were relieved by, the Administration’s statement that “This provision does not govern provider reimbursement rates, which may be subject to quality, performance, or market standards and considerations.” While the statute does not expressly mention consideration of “market standards and considerations,” such a fine point has not stopped federal agencies from elaborating on statutory standards in the past. The FEHBlog expects that this mandated rule making will be a tug of war over statutory interpretation that will wind up in the courts If the providers win this tug of war and the surprise billing arbitrations, then healthcare spending will resume its upward curve.

And there’s more to follow tomorrow. If you want to find the text of H.R. 133 visit this Congress.gov website and download the PDF of the enrolled bill. The ACA amendments may be found in Division BB. You can search for Division BB using the Adobe Acrobat find tool.

Monday Roundup

David Ermer–ACA, Congress, HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules, Rx coverage–
Photo by Sven Read on Unsplash

Tonight the House is voting on the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021(Amendment to H.R. 133), which includes the Fiscal Year 2021 omnibus spending bill, COVID-19 relief measures, and a whole lot more. After the House votes, the Senate will vote and send the Congressionally approved bill along to the President for his expected signature.

Late this afternoon, the FEHBlog found, thanks to the Hill, a complete version of the bill which included 400 pages of complicated amendments to the Affordable Care Act (Division BB). However, when the FEHBlog tried to find that version on the House Rules Committee website tonight in connection with this post, he couldn’t. There’s no sense delving into those healthcare provisions until a law is passed. In the words of John Godfrey Saxe (according to WikiQuotes), “Laws, like sausages, cease to inspire respect in proportion as we know how they are made.”

(P.S. This morning Bloomberg reports that Congress passed H.R. 133 by wide margins. Congress wisely also passed a seven day extension of the current continuing resolution funding the federal government because as Bloomberg reports)

Before the president can sign the full package, it must be enrolled on parchment paper, physically delivered to the White House and reviewed by administration lawyers — a process complicated by the pandemic and coming Christmas holiday.)

Moving on, under current law, a prescription drug manufacturer cannot sell a prescription drug at a price below the best price paid by Medicaid. Only Medicare Part D is excepted from that rule. Today, the Centers for Medicare and Medicare Services (“CMS”) finalized a rule that creates a second exception for value based pricing arrangement. CMS explains:

Under current regulations, prescription drug manufacturers face challenges accounting for VBP arrangements in their Medicaid best price reporting to CMS. This has the unintended consequence of hindering providers, insurers and prescription drug manufacturers in their efforts to develop innovative payment models for new drug therapies and other innovative treatments. Current regulations also discourage payers and manufacturers from designing new payment arrangements based on the value their product may provide.

With the new flexibilities under this final rule, manufacturers will be more willing to negotiate with payers, including Medicaid, with drug pricing being driven by the value of their drug to the individual patient. This is significant, especially in the era of new genetic-based treatments which may initially be expensive, yet in the long run offer significant value to the patient and payer. Payers will be able to negotiate prices with manufacturers for these genetic-based treatments based upon outcomes and evidence-based measures such as reduced hospitalizations, lab visits, and physician office visits, ensuring that if such measures fail to support the value of a drug, the payer is not held accountable for the full price. 

Today’s final rule codifies a broad definition of VBP, which can better align pricing and payment to observed or expected evidence and/or outcomes-based measures in a targeted population. The final rule also allows manufacturers to report multiple best prices instead of a single best price when offering their VBP arrangements to all states. By making these changes, effective in January 2022, CMS hopes to encourage VBP arrangements and negotiations to help make new, innovative therapies more available to all patients. As a result, it is estimated that these new VBP approaches could save up to $228 million in Federal and state dollars through the year 2025.  

Bravo. This action will support FEHB plan efforts to control drug costs.

On the Solarwinds backdoor hack front, Federal News Network discusses its impact on federal government cybersecurity efforts.

Monday Roundup

David Ermer–CDC, COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccine, Wellness–
Photo by Sven Read on Unsplash

The FEHBlog should rename Monday’s column COVID-19 Vaccine Good News because for the fourth Monday in a row that news leads the FEHBlog.

Healthcare Dive reports that “Moderna on Monday released new study results showing the [messenger RNA based] coronavirus vaccine it developed with U.S. government scientists to be 94.1% effective at preventing COVID-19 in a large clinical trial, data the company will use to request emergency approval” from the Food and Drug Administration.

According to Moderna’s announcement

[P]rimary analysis was based on 196 cases [of COVID-19 within the test group of 30,000 individuals, half of whom received the vaccine and the other half of whom received a placebo]. 185 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 11 cases observed in the mRNA-1273 [vaccine] group, resulting in a point estimate of vaccine efficacy of 94.1%. A secondary endpoint analyzed severe cases of COVID-19 and included 30 severe cases (as defined in the study protocol) in this analysis. All 30 cases occurred in the placebo group and none in the mRNA-1273 vaccinated group. There was one COVID-19-related death in the study to date, which occurred in the placebo group.

Efficacy was consistent across age, race and ethnicity, and gender demographics. The 196 COVID-19 cases included 33 older adults (ages 65+) and 42 participants identifying as being from diverse communities (including 29 Hispanic or LatinX, 6 Black or African Americans, 4 Asian Americans and 3 multiracial participants).

The safety profile of the Phase 3 study of mRNA-1273 was previously described on November 16. A continuous review of safety data is ongoing and no new serious safety concerns have been identified by the Company. Based on prior analysis, the most common solicited adverse reactions included injection site pain, fatigue, myalgia, arthralgia, headache, and erythema/redness at the injection site. Solicited adverse reactions increased in frequency and severity in the mRNA-1273 group after the second dose.

Healthcare Dive adds that

Moderna said it will submit on Monday [today] an application for emergency use authorization in the U.S. and for conditional marketing approval in Europe. The FDA will convene a panel of independent advisers to publicly review Moderna’s application, likely on Dec. 17. * * *

An authorization for either vaccine [Pfizer – BioNTech or Moderna] would kick off a mass immunization campaign in the U.S. But supplies of each shot will be extremely limited for months. Moderna expects to have just 20 million doses available in the U.S. this year, and between 500 million to 1 billion in 2021. [Two doses protect one person. The Wall Street Journal notes that Pfizer and BioNTech said they would deliver about 25 million doses by year’s end, potentially enough for about 12.5 million people in the U.S.]

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advisory committee will meet on Tuesday to vote on how vaccine doses will allocated. Healthcare workers on the front lines of the pandemic will likely be vaccinated first.

The Wall Street Journal expands on this last point:

Expected to be first in line: health workers treating coronavirus patients and in something of a surprise, nursing-home residents.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, the outside medical experts advising the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, will vote on who should get the first doses, after discussing plans for distributing the shots and monitoring for potential side effects.

In other news

  • The FEHBlog overlooked the CDC’s Antibiotic Awareness Week which was held from November 18 – 24. Better late than never right. This is an important public health cause and the link provides useful resources.
  • The FEHBlog noticed a Health Payer Intelligence article about a health plan that “has reduced out-of-pocket healthcare spending by collectively giving members millions of dollars in rewards through their My Health Pays program.” The FEHBlog did a little investigative work and he discovered that the health plan in question participates in the ACA marketplace. It is crazy that individual health plans have no limits on wellness reward uses while group health plans generally must limit their wellness rewards to reimbursing medical services and supplies or Medicare premiums. Congress should level the playing field.

Weekend Update

David Ermer–ACA, Congress, COVID-19–

Congress returns to committee work and floor action this coming week for an expected two more weeks of the its lame duck session.

Top House and Senate appropriators on Tuesday [November 24] clinched a deal on a bipartisan set of funding levels, paving the way for a $1.4 trillion spending package to avert a government shutdown next month. The agreement on the funding allocations, confirmed by a House Democratic aide, establishes overall totals for 12 appropriations measures that will be rolled into one massive omnibus bill that would boost federal budgets for the rest of the fiscal year. Negotiators plan to keep the numbers — known as 302(b)s — under wraps until a bipartisan, bicameral omnibus is finalized, the aide said.

This means that Congress remains on track to pass an FY 2021 omnibus spending bill before the current continuing resolution funding the federal government expires on December 12.

Negotiations on another Covid-19 relief bill are at an impasse. Some measures may get attached to a spending package that must pass by Dec. 11 to avert a government shutdown. Another weekly boost to unemployment benefits would most likely be part of the mix, according to unemployment and policy experts.  The subsidy would probably fall between $250 and $600 a week and be retroactive to early September, they said.

  • The Wall Street Journal reports that “President Trump’s decision to defer payroll taxes until the end of the year is leaving challenges for lawmakers to manage after he leaves office in January, and they haven’t figured out what—if anything—to do. * * * [P]ayroll processor Paychex Inc. said take-up has been very low. The one big exception—which could create pressure for Congress to act—is the federal workforce, including many members of the military. Mr. Trump required executive-branch employees to participate. Lawmakers, particularly those from the Washington [D.C.] area, support legislation to let employees decide whether their taxes can be deferred. As the weeks tick by toward the year’s end, that becomes less feasible.

Late Wednesday, the Department of Health and Human Services released the proposed ACA Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters for 2022. Of note, to community rated FEHB plan carriers HHS proposes to make the following changes to the medical loss ratio (“MLR”) calculation:

We propose to amend the MLR regulation to establish the definition of prescription drug rebates and other price concessions that issuers must deduct from incurred claims for medical loss ratio (MLR) reporting and rebate calculation purposes beginning with the 2022 MLR reporting year (MLR reports filed in 2023). We additionally propose to explicitly allow issuers the option to prepay a portion or all of the estimated MLR rebate for a given MLR reporting year in advance of the deadlines set forth in §§ 158.240(e) and 158.241(a)(2) and the filing of the MLR Annual Reporting Form. We also propose to establish a safe harbor allowing such issuers, under certain conditions, to defer the payment of any remaining rebates owed after prepayment until the following MLR reporting year beginning with the 2020 MLR reporting year (MLR reports filed in 2021). In addition, we propose to allow issuers to provide MLR rebates in the form of a premium credit prior to the date that the rules currently provide and beginning with the 2020 MLR reporting year (MLR reports filed in 2021). Lastly, we propose to clarify MLR reporting and rebate requirements for issuers that choose to offer temporary premium credits during a public health emergency declared by the Secretary of HHSfor future benefit years, beginning with the 2021 MLR reporting year (MLR reports filed in 2022). 

Of note to all FEHB plan carriers, HHS proposes to make the following changes to the out of pocket (“OOP”) cost sharing ceilings for in-network care:

The proposed 2022 maximum annual limitation on cost sharing is $9,100 for self-only coverage and $18,200 for other than self-only coverage. This represents an approximately 6.4 percent increase above the 2021 parameters of $8,550 for self-only coverage and $17,100 for other than self-only coverage. Similar to the proposal for the premium adjustment percentage index, for the 2023 benefit year and beyond, we propose to release the maximum annual limitation on cost sharing in guidance by January of the year preceding the applicable benefit year. 

For more details on the Notice check out Katie Keith’s columns on the Health Affairs Blog.

The Biden Administration’s HHS will finalize the Notice next year. HHS has a good deal of statutory discretion over the MLR calculation but very little discretion over (“OOP”) cost sharing ceiling calculations in the FEHBlog’s opinion.

The FEHBlog has learned that a two step process exists for approval a COVID-19 vaccine for individual and group health plan coverage.

  • First, as discussed in the FEHBlog, the FDA must give emergency use authorization to the vaccine. The relevant FDA advisory committee is meeting December 10 to consider the Pfizer – BioNTech vaccine. The Committee’s recommendation goes to the FDA Commissioner for final approval.
  • Once FDA approval has been given, the CDC’s relevant advisory committee the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) must add its approval.
  • Fifteen days after ACIP approval is given, individual and group health plans, including FEHB plans will become obligated to cover the administration of the approved vaccine in and out of network without member cost sharing. That effective date will be in late December at the earliest. 
  • An emergency use authorization can only trigger plan health plan coverage of a vaccine during a related public health emergency. The current COVID-19 public health emergency period expires on January 20, 2021, unless as expected HHS extends that period for another 90 days before then,

Happy Thanksgiving

David Ermer–ACA, U.S. Healthcare–

Even in this difficult year, we Americans can still enjoy our great holiday Thanksgiving. The Wall Street Journal discusses a study of how to cope with the COVID-19 great hunkering down — the results tie in with traditional Thanksgiving activities

“[M]usic [parades], exercise [touch football] and entertainment [NFL football and movies] were the most potent stress relievers for the greatest number of people. But of those three activities, music—singing, dancing, playing an instrument, or just listening to a favorite playlist—was the only one that led to a reduction of depression symptoms. A fifth of all the participants reported it as the most effective way to reduce their pandemic-induced blues. Music’s palliative effects were particularly potent for people who were highly sensitive to rewards.  * * * [Needless to say] Cooking, baking and eating also helped tamp down the blues. 

Health Payer Intelligence reports, and the FEHBlog could not agree more strongly that

Employers are gravitating toward integrated health care benefits to improve member engagement and patient experience as well as lower healthcare spending, according to a report commissioned by Anthem.

Integrated health care interweaves pharmacy, ancillary, supplemental health, and other benefits data into the employer’s health plan to facilitate smoother communication between employees’ providers.

Provider collaboration is key to this strategy. Three key methods for facilitating provider collaboration included connecting all providers through an [electronic medical record] EMR, establishing automatic reminders about extra dental cleanings, and sending health-related reminders to employees. Employers also leveraged AI and apps to connect employees to their benefits.

That’s a very interesting use of EMRs to help close gaps in care.

The Internal Revenue Service has announced that the Affordable Care Act’s Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (“PCORI”) fee “for policy years and plan years that end on or after October 1, 2020, and before October 1, 2021, is $2.66” per covered health plan life (/ bellybutton). The PCORI fee payment is due at the end of July. The adjusted fee is 12 cents higher than the fee paid in July 2020.

Tuesday Tidbits

David Ermer–ACA, COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccine, Rx coverage–
Photo by Patrick Fore on Unsplash

The Boston Globe reports today that

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, said Tuesday that as many as 20 million people could get coronavirus vaccinations around the end of the year.

He said that by that time there could be as many as 25 million doses of vaccine available from Pfizer and 15 million doses available from Moderna. The vaccination takes two shots so that would mean 20 million people could get protection.

He said it could happen by the end of December, or early January if the timeline slips a bit. “That’s what we’re anticipating and hoping,” he said in an interview at the 2020 STAT Summit.

The Wall Street Journal adds that

The strong early results for two leading Covid-19 vaccines have implications that go far beyond the current pandemic: They suggest the time has come for a gene-based technology that could provide new treatments for cancer, heart disease and other infectious diseases.

The [previously] unproven technology, named messenger RNA after the molecular couriers that deliver genetic instructions, has long eluded researchers. An mRNA vaccine has never been cleared by regulators. It is now the basis for Covid-19 vaccines from Moderna Inc.  and Pfizer Inc. and its partner BioNTech SE. * * *

The mRNA vaccines’ early success [with COVID-19] “gives us some encouragement for the technology for other vaccine targets in the future,” said Dr. Mark Mulligan, director of the Vaccine Center at NYU Langone Health. 

One of the advantages of mRNA vaccines, [Biotech co-founder] Dr. [Ugur] Sahin said, is that they can be quickly adjusted so vaccines can better respond to an eventual decline in immunity or virus mutations, which could render other vaccines less effective. Dr. Sahin said that regulator authorization [of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines] could potentially lead to a “whole new category of medicines.”

Hope springs eternal.

Healthcare Dive informs us that “After years of speculation, Amazon finally announced Tuesday that it will sell and deliver prescription drugs on its online platform, Amazon Pharmacy.” Moreover —

Here’s a key distinction in how Amazon Pharmacy will operate: “Before checking out customers can compare their insurance co-pay, the price without insurance, or the available savings with the new Prime prescription savings benefit to choose their lowest price option,” Amazon said.

A previously vexing problem for patients was that sometimes prescription drugs would be cheaper using cash, or without using insurance coverage. But pharmacists were sometimes barred from alerting patients to the discrepancy due to “gag clauses.” In 2018, Congress passed a bill to ban gag clauses in certain plans.

Amazon Pharmacy shoppers will be able to input their insurance information and their clinicians will be able to send prescription information directly to the Amazon Pharmacy.

Speaking of market disruption, Plan Sponsor advises us about the growing popularity of “individual coverage health reimbursement arrangements (ICHRAs) to provide their workers with tax-preferred funds to pay for the cost of health insurance coverage that workers purchase in the individual market [/ the ACA marketplace].” This is the one major Trump Administration reform to the Affordable Care Act that did not attract opposition, in court or elsewhere, because it unquestionably strengthened the ACA marketplace.

On the healthcare studies front –

  • The National Library of Medicine informs us about the susbtantial patient safety benefits of including the patient’s photograph in the top line of their electronic health record when used at healthcare facilities, particularly emergency rooms
  • The National Institutes of Health announced $21 million of funding into research examining racial and ethnic disparities in pregnancy-related complications and deaths.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, approximately 700 women die each year in the United States from pregnancy-related complications.

Research will include original, innovative, and multidisciplinary efforts to advance the understanding, prevention, and reduction of pregnancy-related complications and deaths among disproportionately affected women. This includes women from racial and ethnic minority groups, women with underprivileged socioeconomic status, and those living in underserved rural settings.

The racial disparities in pregnancy-related mortality are stark: respectively, African American and American Indian/Alaska Native women are 3.2 and 2.3 times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than are white women. In the case of African American women, the disparity increases with age. Black women under 20 are 1.5 times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than are white women in the same age group, but black women ages 30-34 are 4.3 times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than are white women ages 30-34. Approximately two thirds of pregnancy-related deaths are preventable, underscoring the need for more research to improve the maternal health outcomes for women before, during, and after delivery.

In addition to maternal deaths, over 25,000 women each year experience severe maternal morbidity(link is external) (SMM), requiring unexpected short- or long-term life-saving healthcare interventions. Like maternal mortality, SMM has a high rate of preventability. All racial and ethnic minority populations have higher rates of SMM than do white women.

Monday Roundup

David Ermer–ACA, CDC, COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccine, SCOTUS–
Photo by Sven Read on Unsplash

Perhaps at last we are beginning to see the light at the end of the COVID-19 tunnel. Pfizer announced positive initial results from the phase three trial of its two dose COVID-19 vaccine.

“Today is a great day for science and humanity. The first set of results from our Phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine trial provides the initial evidence of our vaccine’s ability to prevent COVID-19,” said Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer Chairman and CEO. “We are reaching this critical milestone in our vaccine development program at a time when the world needs it most with infection rates setting new records, hospitals nearing over-capacity and economies struggling to reopen. With today’s news, we are a significant step closer to providing people around the world with a much-needed breakthrough to help bring an end to this global health crisis. We look forward to sharing additional efficacy and safety data generated from thousands of participants in the coming weeks.”

The Wall Street Journal explains (in part) that ‘

“When will the Pfizer vaccine be ready for [emergency use] authorization?

“It will be several more weeks at the earliest, because researchers and regulators still need to make sure the shot is safe. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has said it wants to see two months’ worth of safety outcomes after vaccination for at least half of the people participating in any large, final-stage clinical trial before it considers authorizing a Covid-19 vaccine. The FDA says this will allow identification of any side effects, such as neurological or heart conditions, that weren’t apparent immediately after vaccination. So far, no serious safety issues have been found, Pfizer says. It expects the two months of safety data later this month, and can ask the FDA to authorize the vaccine soon thereafter. It isn’t yet clear how long the FDA will take to make a decision.

“When will people start getting vaccinated?

“Shots from Pfizer and BioNTech could start becoming available before the end of the year, as production has already begun, but initial supplies will be limited. Pfizer says it expects to produce up to 50 million doses globally in 2020—enough for 25 million people because the vaccine is given in two doses—and up to 1.3 billion doses in 2021. This means only the highest risk groups, such as front-line health care workers, could be inoculated this year. Many more doses would be needed to cover the U.S. and global population. Other Covid-19 vaccines in development will likely be needed for everyone to get vaccinated. Their makers have projected they could produce billions of doses next year if their vaccines are successful in clinical testing.”

The Centers for Disease Control released a study of hospital readmissions of COVID-19 patients from March through July 2021.

Among 126,137 unique patients with an index COVID-19 admission during March–July 2020, 15% died during the index hospitalization. Among the 106,543 (85%) surviving patients, 9% (9,504) were readmitted to the same hospital within 2 months of discharge through August 2020. More than a single readmission occurred among 1.6% of patients discharged after the index hospitalization.

The CDC also offered us guidance on avoiding COVID-19 during the Thanksgiving holidays.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) released Affordable Care Act medical loss ratio rebate data from the latest health insurer reports for the three year period ending in 2019. The medical loss ratio data is broken out into three cohorts — individual insurance (minimum MLR 80%), small group insurance (minimum MLR 80%), and large group insurance (minimum MLR 85%). Each cohort then is further broken down state by state which no doubt increase the rebates. FEHB plan insurer rebates sensibly are paid to the the carrier’s contingency reserve, which is FEHB lingo for a premium stabilization fund.

Katie Keith in the Health Affairs blog offers her insights into tomorrow’s California v. Texas oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court. C-SPAN will play the audio live on radio and the internet.

“The main issues to listen for are:

  • “Do the challengers—a coalition of states led by Texas and two individuals—have standing to challenge the ACA?
  • “Is the individual mandate, with a $0 penalty, unconstitutional?
  • “If the mandate is unconstitutional, is it severable from the rest of the ACA? If not, which other ACA provisions should be struck down alongside the mandate?”