New Hampshire 2023 Regular Session

New Hampshire Senate Bill SB82

Introduced
1/18/23  
Refer
1/18/23  
Report Pass
3/22/23  
Engrossed
4/7/23  

Caption

Relative to prompt payments for managed care.

Impact

The legislation will directly modify the requirements outlined in RSA 420-J:8-a. By enforcing stricter timelines for informing providers of claim status and outcomes, SB82 seeks to ensure that claims are processed more efficiently. If health carriers fail to provide the requisite notifications or adjudicate claims within the specified timeframe, these claims are deemed clean and must be paid. Consequently, this bill enhances protections for health care providers and promotes timely reimbursements, potentially improving cash flow for medical practices reliant on insurance payments.

Summary

Senate Bill 82 focuses on enhancing the prompt payment requirements for health insurers in managed care settings. The legislation amends existing laws regarding notifications that health carriers must provide when denying or pending claims. Specifically, it mandates timeframes for notification—15 calendar days for electronic claims and 30 days for non-electronic claims—thereby increasing accountability for health insurers in their interactions with healthcare providers and patients. This aims to facilitate prompt payment processes and reduce delays in claim adjudication.

Sentiment

Discussions surrounding SB82 indicate a predominantly positive sentiment among stakeholders advocating for improved payment processes in the healthcare industry. Supporters, including healthcare providers and advocacy groups, argue that the bill addresses long-standing challenges with claim delays and enhances the financial viability of medical practices. However, it is also acknowledged that some health insurers may view these requirements as burdensome, highlighting a potential divide in how the bill's implications are perceived across different sectors of the healthcare landscape.

Contention

One notable point of contention is the balancing act between ensuring duty of care from health insurers and the administrative burden placed upon them. Critics argue that while the intent is to safeguard providers, the stringent requirements may compel insurers to allocate additional resources to manage claims more effectively. This shift could lead to increased operational costs for insurers, which might subsequently impact premiums or the overall cost of care. Hence, the discussions revolve around finding an equilibrium that retains the safeguards for prompt payments while not unduly hindering the operational capabilities of health insurance companies.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

NH SB82

Relative to prompt payments for managed care.

NH SB561

Relative to prior authorizations for health care.

NH SB2677

Pharmacy Benefit Prompt Pay Act; define requirements for pharmacy benefit managers and pharmacy services administrative organizations.

NH H1215

Relative to pharmacy benefit managers

NH HB661

Relative to the department of health and human services management of social security payments, supplemental security income payments, and veterans benefits for children in foster care.

NH HB1612

Pharmacy benefit managers; revise provisions relating to.

NH HB1299

Pharmacy benefit managers; require to make available to the public, without redaction, contracts relating to pharmacy benefit management services.

NH SB555

Relative to receipt of pharmaceutical rebates by insurers and pharmacy benefits managers.

NH HB1598

Relative to the department of health and human services management of social security payments and veterans benefits for children in foster care.

NH AB1162

Health care coverage: claims payments.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.