Colorado 2024 Regular Session

Colorado House Bill HB1382

Introduced
3/25/24  
Introduced
3/25/24  
Report Pass
4/10/24  
Refer
3/25/24  
Report Pass
4/10/24  
Report Pass
4/23/24  
Refer
4/10/24  
Report Pass
4/23/24  
Refer
4/23/24  
Engrossed
4/26/24  
Engrossed
4/26/24  
Report Pass
5/2/24  
Refer
4/26/24  
Report Pass
5/2/24  
Report Pass
5/4/24  
Refer
5/2/24  
Report Pass
5/4/24  
Refer
5/4/24  
Engrossed
5/28/24  
Engrossed
5/28/24  
Engrossed
5/28/24  
Passed
6/3/24  
Enrolled
5/28/24  

Caption

Insurance Coverage Pediatric Neuropsychiatric Syndrome

Impact

If passed, HB1382 would amend the Colorado Revised Statutes to include specific provisions about PANS and PANDAS, thereby impacting health insurance policies across the state. It aims to reduce barriers that currently exist in accessing appropriate medical care for children diagnosed with these conditions. By doing so, it sets a precedent for how insurance companies must operate regarding specialized health conditions, potentially improving overall health outcomes for affected youth.

Summary

House Bill 1382 aims to require all individual and group health benefit plans in Colorado to provide coverage for the diagnosis, treatment, and prophylaxis of Pediatric Acute-Onset Neuropsychiatric Syndrome (PANS) and Pediatric Autoimmune Neuropsychiatric Disorder Associated with Streptococcal Infections (PANDAS). This legislation is designed to ensure that affected children have access to necessary medical therapies, including antibiotics, medication, and various behavioral therapies. The bill mandates that coverage aligns with clinical practice guidelines established by a consortium of medical professionals specialized in these disorders.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB1382 appears to be largely supportive among healthcare advocates and families affected by PANS and PANDAS. Supporters argue that the bill is critical for ensuring timely and effective treatment for these often debilitating conditions. Conversely, there may be concerns regarding the financial implications for insurance providers and the potential for increased premiums, which could generate opposition from some legislators and stakeholders in the insurance industry.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding the bill include concerns about the appropriateness of enforcing such coverage mandates on insurance providers. Opponents may argue that this could lead to increased healthcare costs and pressure the insurance market. Additionally, there may be discussions about the sufficiency of the scientific evidence supporting the mandatory coverage of these relatively newly recognized conditions, which could affect how the legislation is perceived by various parties involved.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB395

Substance use treatment providers.

AZ HB2745

Court-ordered treatment; enhanced services

AZ SB1310

Court-ordered treatment; enhanced services.

AZ HB2944

Inpatient treatment days; computation; exclusion

CA SB349

California Ethical Treatment for Persons with Substance Use Disorder Act.

AZ HB2041

Mental health; voluntary evaluations; payment

CA AB1230

Gambling disorder prevention.

IA HF518

A bill for an act establishing a veterans recovery pilot program and fund for the reimbursement of expenses related to providing hyperbaric oxygen treatment to eligible veterans and making appropriations.(Formerly HF 326.)