by Leslie Small
If Congress or the Trump administration are able to enact any
type of drug-pricing reform during 2020, it's likely to be a redesign of
Medicare Part D, industry experts tell AIS Health.
In the Senate, tweaking the Part D benefit is part of a larger
piece of bipartisan legislation (S. 2543), championed by Sens. Chuck Grassley
(R-Iowa) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). From the House, there’s the sweeping
legislation (H.R. 3) proffered by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
Both bills would implement out-of-pocket spending caps for Part
D beneficiaries and considerably change how costs are divided up in the
catastrophic phase of coverage. They would also require drug manufacturers to
repay Medicare if certain Part B or Part D drug prices rise faster than
inflation.
"If you look at both the House and the Senate bills that
have been put forward here, those [Part D] designs look very similar to one
another, so I'm somewhat optimistic that…maybe there's an opportunity for that
to move forward," says Stacie Dusetzina, an associate professor of health
policy at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.
However, Elizabeth Carpenter at Avalere Health contends that
"it is unlikely in this environment that any drug pricing legislation
would move as a standalone bill." The most likely pre-election vehicle for
a Part D redesign would be the health care extenders package that expires in
May, she adds.
Gerard Anderson, a professor at Johns Hopkins University
Bloomberg School of Public Health, is more optimistic. "Drug pricing is the
No. 1 issue for most voters when they're talking about health care," he
points out. "So they're going to feel a strong pressure" to pass
something in Congress. Given that dynamic, he says he expects the
Wyden/Grassley bill is likely to pass this year.
In whatever form a Part D redesign passes, Dusetzina says the
biggest winner would be patients. While manufacturers and health plans would be
on the hook for more spending in the catastrophic coverage phase, "on net,
it probably isn't very harmful for any one entity," she contends.
No comments:
Post a Comment