150 likes | 252 Views
Learn about Medicaid eligibility, structure, prescription drug benefits, case studies, and the impact of Medicaid reform on access to medications. Explore legal cases, entitlements, and complexities of prescription denials. Understand Medicare Part D and its implications.
E N D
Medicaid: A Brief Overview and Case Studies on Access to Prescription Drugs Miriam Harmatz Florida Legal Services February 25, 2009
Medicaid Eligibility • Need categorical connection - Aged or disabled - Child or parent • Low income - Parent with child: income must be below $682 and assets less than $2,000 - Aged, blind or disabled: income must be below $657 assets less than $2,000
Medicaid Structure • Federal/State funding • State flexibility but federal law controls 42 U.S.C. § 1396 et seq. • Entitlement* • Complicated
Prescription Drug Benefit • $$$: huge budget item, with costs rising more quickly than other benefits • Prior authorization: tool for controlling costs required for certain brand name drugs and drugs not on PDL • Result: patients did not get their meds
Due Process for Prescription Denials • Hernandez et al. v. Medows, 209 F.R.D. 665 (S.D. Fla 2002.) • Medicaid statute 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(3) • Goldberg v. Kelly • Medicaid regulations 42 C.F.R. § 431.200 et seq. • 14th Amendment
Importance of data, experts and settlement • Discovery regarding drug denials • Relationship to class and permanent injunction • Complexity of benefit: settlement best outcome
What drugs can be prescribed? • On label • Off label
Medically accepted indication • 42 U.S.C. § 1396r-8(k)(6) The term “medically accepted indication” means any use for a covered outpatient drug which is approved under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [21 U.S.C.A. § 301 et. Seq.], or the use of which is supported by one or more citations included or approved for inclusion in any of the compendia described in subsection (g)(1)(b)(i) of this section. • Compendia • Applies to Medicaid & Medicare Part D
Edmonds et al. v. Levine • Off label marketing abuses • State response • Adverse impact on recipients
Structure of prescription benefit • Rebates • Very limited grounds for denial • Role of Compendia • Can PA
Medicaid Reform • Goal to block grant/privatize • Defined benefit/predictable spending • Plans determine amount, duration, and scope • PD limits on # • Lack of data regarding denials
Medicare Part D • Privatized model • Limited government role • Lack of denial data or info on price negotiations • Lack of uniform PDL structure
“Medically Needy” hurt by Part D • Categorical connection: Aged or disabled • over income or over assets; share of cost (SOC) like deductible • Before Part D those with high drug costs met SOC • Full Medicaid-including drug benefit/no co-payments • Full Medicare cost share benefit deductible, co-insurance, co payments • After Part D • Lost Medicaid • Huge Part D co-payments • No Medicare cost sharing benefit
Medicare Part D “Victim” • RB needs transplant • Income $1200/month, plus Medicare • Medically needy share of cost (SOC) $ 900 • Transplant drugs Part B: $ 700 • All other drugs covered by Part D • Cannot meet Share of cost; or afford cost of Part B drugs • Rejected for evaluation
Is health care right or responsibility? • If right- for everyone or just the “categorically connected” poor? • If right for everyone, cover every medically necessary service? • Government v. private sector?