North Dakota Senate Bill SB2378

North Dakota 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/23/23
• Refer: 1/23/23
• Report Pass: 2/16/23
• Engrossed: 2/20/23
• Refer: 2/21/23
• Report Pass: 3/28/23
• Enrolled: 3/31/23
• Passed: 4/5/23

Caption

Clinician-administered drugs.

Impact

If enacted, SB2378 would create significant changes in how outpatient prescription drugs are procured and administered in North Dakota. By preventing restrictions on patient choice related to clinician-administered drugs, the bill aims to enhance healthcare accessibility. Furthermore, it holds third-party payers accountable by ensuring that they cannot increase costs for patients choosing non-affiliated providers. This regulatory shift could lead to a reassessment of existing procurement practices in the healthcare sector and bolstered patient rights across the state.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 2378 seeks to regulate the handling of clinician-administered drugs within the state, aiming to improve patient access and rights concerning these medications. The bill prohibits pharmacy benefits managers and third-party payers from requiring patients to utilize specific mail-order pharmacies or affiliated entities as a condition for reimbursement. Instead, it promotes the patient's right to choose their provider, ensuring they can obtain clinician-administered drugs from the provider of their choice without incurring additional costs or limitations based on pharmacy affiliations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB2378 is largely supportive among healthcare advocates who view it as a necessary step in promoting patient rights and choice. Proponents argue that the bill fosters a more competitive and equitable environment for accessing necessary medications, particularly for outpatient care. However, there may be apprehension from pharmacy benefits managers who interpret the changes as an encroachment on their operational practices and a potential increase in administrative burdens they must manage.

Contention

Notable points of contention within discussions about SB2378 include the balance between ensuring patient rights and potential logistical challenges faced by pharmacy benefits managers. Critics may argue that while the intent to enhance patient freedom is admirable, it risks disrupting established practices and could lead to shortages or increased prices in clinician-administered drugs if not implemented carefully. The ongoing dialogue will need to address these logistical realities while ensuring that the needs of patients are prioritized.