Pharmacy audit; procedures; prohibition
The legislative changes proposed by SB 1165 are designed to protect pharmacies from punitive retroactive reductions of claim payments unless specific criteria are met, such as discovering fraud. Additionally, the bill prevents auditing entities from recouping payments for clerical errors and bars accruing interest during the audit period, contributing to a more favorable operating environment for pharmacies. By establishing these regulations, the bill aims to ensure that pharmacies are treated fairly and that the audit process does not infringe upon their rights.
Senate Bill 1165 aims to amend the auditing procedures for pharmacies in Arizona, focusing primarily on the methods used by auditing entities during pharmacy audits. The bill seeks to enhance the fairness and transparency of these audits by implementing strict guidelines that auditing entities must follow. Key provisions include requiring a 14-day written notice before an audit can begin, limiting audits to claims no older than two years, and explicitly stating that audits involving clinical judgment must include consultation with a pharmacist.
The sentiment surrounding SB 1165 appears largely positive, particularly among pharmacy owners and advocates who have expressed frustration with previous auditing practices that they perceive as excessive and detrimental to their business operations. Proponents of the bill believe it will ease the burden of compliance and reduce the potential for financial losses due to auditing errors. However, there may also be concerns among insurers and auditing firms regarding the implications of these regulations on their operational flexibility and oversight capabilities.
Despite the positive reception from many pharmacy stakeholders, there may be contention from auditing entities and insurance companies who argue that these new regulations could hinder their ability to effectively monitor and manage healthcare costs. The balance between protecting pharmacies from overreaching audits and ensuring that proper oversight remains in place will be a critical point of discussion as stakeholders assess the long-term implications of SB 1165.