DOCSLIB.ORG

Prospective DUR Prospective Drug Use Review (DUR) Is Performed Electronically at the Time a Drug Is Dispensed to a Patient

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prospective DUR Prospective Drug Use Review (DUR) Is Performed Electronically at the Time a Drug Is Dispensed to a Patient DUR: Prospective DUR Prospective Drug Use Review (DUR) is performed electronically at the time a drug is dispensed to a patient. This review is designed to identify potential problems such as drug-drug interactions, therapeutic duplication, inappropriate dosage, or duration of therapy. When a pharmacist is alerted to a potential problem, he or she is expected to use professional judgment to determine an appropriate intervention. In accordance with California Board of Pharmacy requirements and federal rules, Medi-Cal prospective DUR includes the following general requirements: • The pharmacist must maintain patient medication records. • The pharmacist must screen for potential therapeutic problems before the prescription is dispensed to the patient. • The pharmacist must counsel patients on all new or changed prescriptions and on refills when the pharmacist deems it warranted or the patient requests it. California Board of Pharmacy regulations require these activities for all patients, including Medi-Cal. For Medi- Cal beneficiaries, as described in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 42 Part 456, Subpart K – Drug Use Review (DUR) Program and Electronic Claims Management System for Outpatient Drug Claims, Section 456.705, 10-1-12 Edition, prospective DUR requires that all prescriptions must at least be screened by pharmacists for therapeutic duplication, drug-disease contraindications, adverse drug-drug interactions, incorrect drug dosage, incorrect duration of drug treatment, drug-allergy interactions, and clinical misuse/additive toxicity. In addition, the Medi-Cal Point of Service (POS) network screens prescriptions for targeted drugs for potential drug therapy problems due to ingredient duplication, overutilization, underutilization, drug-age conflicts, drug-gender conflicts, and drug-pregnancy conflicts. Prospective DUR screening must use predetermined standards, which are based upon evidence-based practice guidelines, disease-specific health improvement programs developed by the State of California, peer- reviewed medical literature, and the following compendia: • American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information • United States Pharmacopoeia Drug Information • American Medical Association Drug Evaluations In accordance with the requirements of the California State Board of Pharmacy, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 16, Section 1707.3, conducting prospective DUR screening is the sole responsibility of the pharmacist. Pharmacies may use commercially available DUR database packages to assist with prospective DUR. Such database packages must be able to screen for therapeutic problems based on explicit standards. It is not expected that commercial databases will contain patient-specific diagnosis or allergy information. When, in the pharmacist’s professional judgment, obtaining such information is essential, he or she should consult the patient or the patient’s health care provider. DUR: Prospective DUR 1 July 2020 Medi-Cal Prospective DUR Target Drugs Any drug paid for by the Medi-Cal program may be placed on a target drug list. Target drugs are subject to analysis and the target drug lists may be revised at any time, as directed by the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS). Medi-Cal prospective DUR target drugs are selected based on the following overarching logical rules: 1. Therapeutic disease – Drugs that are grouped by therapeutic disease category, such as mental health, arthritis, asthma, infectious disease, etc., may be added to a target drug list. Medications that are recommended as part of nationally accepted, evidence-based guidelines will be monitored for adherence to such guidelines. Therapeutic disease categories may be included, especially if there is a Board member with sufficient expertise to guide the selection and review of these drugs. 2. Drugs with high risk or rare use – Drugs that have a narrow therapeutic range and potential for severe toxicity may be added to a target drug list. Along with these are drugs whose use is so infrequent that knowledge of common parameters might not be generally accessible. 3. Drugs with high cost and/or high risk for fraud, abuse or misuse – Drugs that hold or have demonstrated exceptionally high risk for fraud, abuse or misuse may be added to a target drug list, in support of the intent of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA ’90) to directly address these issues. This will not preclude these drugs from appearing on a target drug list for therapeutic or high risk. Automated DUR screening applies to prospective DUR target drugs billed to Medi-Cal through the POS network. If a DUR alert is generated, the pharmacist must respond with valid Professional Service Codes and Result of Service Codes when resubmitting the claim for payment. Note that although automated DUR will be performed on certain targeted drugs, it remains the pharmacist’s responsibility to review all prescriptions for potential problems regardless of the prescribed drug’s status as a target drug. For more information about automated DUR when submitting claims through the POS network, refer to your vendor-supplied user guide or contact the POS/Internet Help Desk at 1-800-427-1295. Pharmacies without computers, or that choose not to use the Medi-Cal automated claims adjudication system with its online DUR component, must undertake prospective DUR screening based on published DUR alert criteria. There are three prospective DUR alerts that are currently active for all drugs: overutilization, drug-drug interactions flagged as Severity Level 1, and drug-pregnancy conflicts in which a drug is contraindicated or not recommended during pregnancy. All other alerts are active for selected prospective DUR target drugs only. Providers may refer to the Medi-Cal Fee-for-Service Prospective Drug Use Review (DUR) Target Drugs spreadsheet for more information. DUR: Prospective DUR 2 July 2020 Role of the Global Medi-Cal DUR Board The Global Medi-Cal DUR Board (the “Board”) serves in an advisory capacity to DHCS on an ongoing basis in order to assess prospective DUR alert data against predetermined standards. As necessary, the Board may recommend remedial strategies in order to improve the quality of care. Noting that standards of care and practices change with time, the Board also serves in an advisory capacity to DHCS in the development and implementation of evidence-based methodology for determining standards to identify, classify, target, and act upon those drug interactions that pose the greatest risk for drug-induced illness. Standard DUR Message The National Council for Prescription Drug Programs (NCPDP) has developed standardized pharmacy transactions for DUR to facilitate the transfer of information to Medi-Cal as well as other third-party payers. The data elements selected for standard DUR messages provide information for the pharmacist to use in determining a response to the DUR alert. The following data elements may be provided as part of the DUR message: • Clinical Significance – This indicates the clinical significance assigned to the DUR conflict. Medi-Cal notifies pharmacists only of DUR conflicts of major significance, which is noted as a significance level = 1. • Other Pharmacy Indicator – The value in this field indicates the dispensing location or source of the previous prescription that is in conflict with the prescription being submitted. A conflict at the same pharmacy = 1 and a conflict at another pharmacy = 3. • Previous Fill Date – This field indicates the fill date of the prescription that triggered the conflict with the submitted prescription. • Quantity of Previous Fill – This field indicates the quantity of the conflicting agent that was previously dispensed. • Other Prescriber Indicator – This field indicates whether the previously filled conflicting prescription and the current prescription were written by the same or different prescribers. The same prescriber = 1 and another prescriber = 2. The procedure for responding to DUR alerts is as follows: • Pharmacist receives DUR alert message(s) on the computer screen; the claim is rejected for DUR • Pharmacist reviews and resolves identified DUR conflict(s) by contacting the prescriber, talking with the patient, and/or using other resources or professional judgment • Pharmacist resubmits claim with a six-character response in the DUR field • Pharmacist receives a paid response if the prescription was filled or a captured response if the claim was cancelled If the eligibility verification system identifies more than three DUR conflicts, the overflow indicator is displayed. Pharmacists may call the POS Help Desk at 1-800-427-1295 to receive the additional alerts. DUR: Prospective DUR 3 July 2020 Pharmacy DUR Reason for Service, Professional Service, and Result of Service Codes A DUR response includes three components. Reason for Service Codes reflect the type of potential therapeutic problem identified by the Medi-Cal eligibility verification system. Professional Service Codes consist of alphanumeric characters that identify the action the pharmacist took to resolve the DUR conflict. Result of Service Codes tell the Medi-Cal eligibility verification system if the prescription was dispensed and determine the payment status of the claim. Reason for Service Codes DA Drug-Allergy Conflict AT Additive Toxicity PG Drug-Pregnancy Conflict ID Ingredient Duplication MC Drug-Disease Conflict PA Drug-Age Alert DD Drug-Drug Interaction HD High Dose TD Therapeutic Duplication LD Low Dose ER Overutilization (Early Refill) MX Incorrect Duration of Therapy LR Underutilization (Late Refill) SX Drug-Gender Conflict Professional Service Codes M0 (M zero) Prescriber Consulted P0 (P zero) Patient Consulted R0 (R zero) Pharmacist Consulted Other Source Result of Service Codes 1A Filled as is, false positive 1B Filled prescription as is 1C Filled with different dose 1D Filled with different directions 1E Filled with different drug 1F Filled with different quantity 1G Filled with prescriber approval 2A Prescription not filled 2B Prescription not filled, direction clarified DUR: Prospective DUR 4 July 2020 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DC Health Systems Plan 2017
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HEALTH SYSTEMS PLAN 2017 NOTICE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION In accordance with the D.C. Human Rights Act of 1977, as amended, D.C. Code section 2.1401.01 et seq., the District of Columbia does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, family responsibilities, matriculation, political affiliation, disability, source of income, or place of residence or business. Discrimination in violation of the Act will not be tolerated. Violators will be subject to disciplinary action. Published July, 2017 Dear Residents: Upon taking office in 2015, my Administration focused on improving health outcomes for all residents, recognizing that all government policies—from education and housing, to economic development and transportation—impact the health and wellness of our communities. Every Washingtonian, regardless of where they live, should have the ability to live a healthy and fulfilling life in our nation’s capital. This Health Systems Plan will serve as a guide for all stakeholders as they implement initiatives aimed at strengthening Washington DC’s health system to improve the overall health status of residents by ad- dressing social determinants of health and promoting health equity. Through this plan, we will ensure that public and private agencies throughout DC have the direction they need to make sound investments and implement initiatives that will improve the health and well-being of residents across all eight wards. I am proud of the work we have done thus far. In 2016, the number of newly diagnosed HIV cases in Washington, DC decreased by 52 percent to 347.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 54 Manual of Requirements for Family Child Care Registration
    CHAPTER 54 MANUAL OF REQUIREMENTS FOR FAMILY CHILD CARE REGISTRATION STATE OF NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EFFECTIVE - March 20, 2017 EXPIRES - February 21, 2024 DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES OFFICE OF LICENSING PO BOX 717 TRENTON, NEW JERSEY 08625-0717 Toll - Free Telephone 1-877-667-9845 N.J.A.C. 3A:54 MANUAL OF REQUIREMENTS FOR FAMILY CHILD CARE REGISTRATION SUBCHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS................................................................................ 1 3A:54-1.1 Legal authority ................................................................................................................ 1 3A:54-1.2 Definitions ....................................................................................................................... 2 3A:54-1.3 Approval requirements for sponsoring organizations ..................................................... 4 3A:54-1.4 Public access to records ................................................................................................... 6 SUBCHAPTER 2. ADMINISTRATION OF SPONSORING ORGANIZATIONS ................... 8 3A:54-2.1 Sponsoring organization eligibility ................................................................................. 8 3A:54-2.2 Administrative responsibility .......................................................................................... 8 3A:54-2.3 Reporting requirements ................................................................................................... 9 3A:54-2.4 Sponsoring organization records
    [Show full text]
  • Balance Billing Protection for Out-Of-Network Services
    Form 405-A (eff. 1/2021) BALANCE BILLING PROTECTION FOR OUT-OF-NETWORK SERVICES Starting January 1, 2021, Virginia state law may protect you from “balance billing” when you get: • EMERGENCY SERVICES from an out-of-network hospital, or an out-of-network doctor or other medical provider at a hospital; or • NON-EMERGENCY SURGICAL OR ANCILLARY SERVICES from an out-of-network lab or health care professional at an in-network hospital, ambulatory surgical center or other health care facility. What is balance billing? • An “IN-NETWORK” health care provider has signed a contract with your health insurance plan. Providers who haven’t signed a contract with your health plan are called “OUT-OF-NETWORK” providers. • In-network providers have agreed to accept the amounts paid by your health plan after you, the patient, has paid for all required cost sharing (copayments, coinsurance and deductibles for covered services). • But, if you get all or part of your care from out-of-network providers, you could be billed for the difference between what your plan pays to the provider and the amount the provider bills you. This is called “balance billing.” • The new Virginia law prevents certain balance billing, but it does not apply to all health plans. Applies May Apply Does Not Apply o Fully insured managed care plans, o Employer-based coverage o Health plans issued to an including those bought through o Health plans issued to an employer association outside Virginia HealthCare.gov outside Virginia o Health plans that do not use a o The state employee health plan o Short-term limited duration plans network of providers o Group health plans that opt-in o Limited benefit plans How can I find out if I am protected? Be sure to check your plan documents or contact your health plan to find out if you are protected by this law.
    [Show full text]
  • Tool 1. Scenarios Guide
    Tool 1. Scenarios Guide Tool 1. Scenarios Guide The following 18 scenarios were developed specifically for the privacy and security project to provide a standardized context for discussing organization-level business practices across all states and territories. The scenarios represent a wide range of purposes for the exchange of health information (eg, treatment, public health, biosurveillance, payment, research, marketing) across a broad array of organizations involved in health information exchange and actors within those organizations. The product of the “guided or focused” discussions will be a database of organization-level business practices that will form the basis for the assessment of variation upon which all other work will be based. Each scenario describes a health information exchange (HIE) within a given context to ensure that we cover most of the areas in which we expect to find barriers. Clearly, these scenarios do not cover the universe of exchanges. However, the purposes and conditions represented should be more than adequate to get the discussions of privacy and security policy moving forward. Exhibit 1 shows a mapping of stakeholder organizations identified in the HIE scenarios. A shaded box containing an “X” with some additional text indicates stakeholders that are explicitly identified in the scenario. A yellow box with no text indicates a stakeholder group that could conceivably weigh in on a scenario. For example, Scenario 1: Patient Care Scenario A, involves an exchange between the emergency room in Hospital A and an out-of- state hospital, Hospital B. Both the requesting and releasing organizations are hospitals, regardless of the actors that may be representing those organizations in the work group meetings, which may include physicians, nurses, health information management professionals, and others.
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas Department of Health and Environment
    KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT KANSAS LAWS AND REGULATIONS FOR LICENSING DAY CARE HOMES AND GROUP DAY CARE HOMES FOR CHILDREN JANUARY 2020 Division of Public Health Bureau of Family Health Child Care Licensing Program 1000 SW Jackson, Suite 200, Topeka, KS 66612-1274 Phone: (785) 296-1270 Fax: (785) 559-4244 Website: http://www.kdheks.gov/bcclr/index.html E-mail: [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Kansas Child Care Licensing Laws, Revised July 2018 Page K.S.A. 65-501 License or temporary permit required; exemptions ...........................1 K.S.A. 65-503 Definitions .........................................................................................1 K.S.A. 65-504 Licenses; contents; limitations; posting; inspections; temporary permits; access to premises; temporary licenses; denial or revocation of license; procedure ........................................................2 K.S.A. 65-505 License fees; maternity centers and child care licensing fee fund .....4 K.S.A. 65-506 Notice of issuance, limitation, modification, suspension or revocation of license; notice to parents or guardians of enrollees of limitation, modification, suspension, revocation or denial; unlicensed placements prohibited ......................................................5 K.S.A. 65-507 Records of maternity centers and child care facilities; confidentiality ....................................................................................6 K.S.A. 65-508 Equipment, supplies, accommodations; competent supervision and care of children; safe
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf Examination Performances of U.S
    U.S. Health Care Workforce By John J. Norcini, John R. Boulet, W. Dale Dauphinee, Amy Opalek, Ian D. Krantz, and Suzanne T. Anderson doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0222 HEALTH AFFAIRS 29, NO. 8 (2010): 1461–1468 ©2010 Project HOPE— Evaluating The Quality Of Care The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc. Provided By Graduates Of International Medical Schools John J. Norcini (jnorcini@ ABSTRACT One-quarter of practicing physicians in the United States are FAIMER.org) is president and graduates of international medical schools. The quality of care provided chief executive officer of the Foundation for Advancement by doctors educated abroad has been the subject of ongoing concern. Our of International Medical Education and Research analysis of 244,153 hospitalizations in Pennsylvania found that patients (FAIMER), in Philadelphia, of doctors who graduated from international medical schools and were Pennsylvania. not U.S. citizens at the time they entered medical school had significantly John R. Boulet is associate lower mortality rates than patients cared for by doctors who graduated vice president for research and data resources at from U.S. medical schools or who were U.S. citizens and received their FAIMER. degrees abroad. The patient population consisted of those with congestive heart failure or acute myocardial infarction. We found no W. Dale Dauphinee is a senior scholar at FAIMER. significant mortality difference when comparing all international medical graduates with all U.S. medical school graduates. Amy Opalek is a data resource specialist at FAIMER. Ian D. Krantz is an associate professor of pediatrics at the Children’sHospitalof raduates of international medical We hope that the results will serve as a spring- Philadelphia and the Division schools make up approximately board for changes in medical education practices of Human Genetics and Molecular Biology at the one-quarter of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Prescription Drug Benefit Manual Chapter 7 – Medication Therapy Management and Quality Improvement Program
    Prescription Drug Benefit Manual Chapter 7 – Medication Therapy Management and Quality Improvement Program Table of Contents (Rev. 11, 02-19-10) Transmittals for Chapter 7 10 – Medication Therapy Management and Quality Improvement Program 10.1 Introduction 10.2 Definition of Terms 20 – Quality Assurance Requirements 20.1 – General Rule 20.2 – Compliance With State Standards 20.3 – Concurrent Drug Utilization Review (DUR) 20.4 – Retrospective Drug Utilization Review (RDUR) 20.5 – Medication Error Identification and Reduction (MEIR) 20.6 – Medwatch Reporting 20.7 – CMS Performance Measures 20.8 – Information for Quality Improvement Organizations (QIOs) 30 – Medication Therapy Management Program (MTMP) 30.1 – General Rule 30.2 – Targeted Beneficiaries 30.3 – MTM Services 30.4 – Use of Experts 30.5 – Considerations in MTMP Fees 30.6 – MTMP Application 30.7 – MTMP Approval Considerations 30.8 – Mid–Year MTMP Changes 30.9 – MTMP Reporting 30.10 - Claims Processing for MTM Services 40 – Consumer Satisfaction Surveys 40.1 – General Rule 40.2 – Part D Sponsor Follow-up Responsibilities 50 – Electronic Prescription Program (E-prescribing) 50.1 – General Rule 50.2 – State Law Preemption 50.3 – Standards for E-Prescribing 50.4 – Exemptions 50.5 – Promotion of Electronic Prescribing by MA-PD Plans 60 – Drug Utilization Management Program 60.1 – General Rule 60.2 – Over-the-Counter Drugs as Part of Utilization Management Programs 60.3 – Exception for Private Fee-for-Service MA Plans 60.4 – Drug Utilization Management Disclosure Requirements 60.5 – Web site Posting Requirements 60.6 – Revision of Utilization Management Criteria Requirements 70 - Part D Complaints Processing 70.1 – General Rule 70.2 – Timeframes for Complaints Processing Appendix A – Chapter 7 Related Web Sites 10 – Medication Therapy Management and Quality Improvement Program (Rev.
    [Show full text]
  • Certification of Health Care Provider Employee Health Condition Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (“FMLA”)
    Human Resources Division 250 E 200 S Suite 125, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Fax: (801) 585-7375 Certification of Health Care Provider Employee Health Condition Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (“FMLA”) SECTION I: For Completion by the EMPLOYEE INSTRUCTIONS to the EMPLOYEE: Please complete Section I before giving this form to your medical provider. The FMLA permits the University to require that you submit a timely, complete, and sufficient medical certification to support a request for FMLA leave due to your own serious health condition. This Certification is required to obtain or retain the benefit of FMLA protections. 29 U.S.C. §§ 2613, 2614(c)(3). Failure to provide a complete and sufficient medical certification may result in a denial of your FMLA request. 20 C.F.R. § 825.313. Your completed form must be returned to the University’s Absence Management Team within 15 calendar days. 29 C.F.R. § 825.305(b). Employee Name: University Employee Identification Number: I hereby authorize a representative of the University of Utah Division of Human Resources to contact my Health Care Provider for purposes of clarification and/or authentication of this Certificate of Health Care Provider. Signature of Employee Date SECTION II: For Completion by the HEALTH CARE PROVIDER INSTRUCTIONS to the HEALTH CARE PROVIDER: Your patient has requested leave under the FMLA. Please answer, fully and completely, all applicable parts. Several questions seek a response as to the frequency or duration of a condition, treatment, etc. Your answer should be your best estimate based upon your medical knowledge, experience, and examination of the patient.
    [Show full text]
  • Rules and Regulations for the Utilization Review of Health Care Services (R23
    RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE UTILIZATION REVIEW OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES (R23-17.12-UR) STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS Department of Health August 1993 (E) As amended: August 1993 December 1993 (E) February 1994 May 1994 (E) July 1994 March 1997 May 1997 April 1998 (E) July 1998 January 2000 March 2001 November 2001 January 2002 (re-filing in accordance with the provisions of section 42-35- 4.1 of the Rhode Island General Laws, as amended) October 2002 April 2004 February 2007 INTRODUCTION These Rules and Regulations for the Utilization Review of Health Care Services (R23- 17.12-UR) are promulgated pursuant to the authority conferred under Chapters 23-17.12 and 42-35 of the General Laws of Rhode Island, as amended, and are established for the purpose of defining minimum standards for the utilization review of health care services, and the delivery of health care in a cost effective manner. In accordance with the provisions of section 42-35-3 (c) of the General Laws of Rhode Island, as amended, in the development of the regulations, consideration was given to: (1) alternative approaches to the regulations; and (2) duplication or overlap with other state regulations. Based on the available information, no known alternative approach, duplication or overlap was identified. These amended regulations shall supersede all previous Rules and Regulations for the Utilization Review of Health Care Services (R23-17.12-UR) promulgated by the Department of Health and filed with the Secretary of State. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Definitions
    [Show full text]
  • Glossary Cf Health Coverage and Medical Terms
    Glossary cf Health Coverage and Medical Terms r This glossary has many commonly used terms, but isn't a full lisl These glossary terms and definitions are intended to be educational and may be different from the terms and definitions in your plan. Some of these terms also might not have exacdy the same meaning when used in your policy or plan, and in any such case, the policy or plan governs. (See your Summary of Benefits and Coverage for information on how to get a copy of your policy or plan document.) . Berld blue text indicates a terrn defined in this Glossary. I See page 4 for an example showing how deductibles, cc-instrance and out-of-pocket limix work togerher in a real life situation. Allowed Amount Co-palznerrt Maximum amount on which payment is based for A fixed amount (for example, $I5) you pay for a covered covered health care seryices. This may be called "eligible health care service, usually when you receive the service. expense," "payment allowancett or "negotiated rate.tt If The amount can vary by the type of covered health care your ptovider charges more chan che allowed amount, you service. may have to pay the difference. (See Bala*ce Bi[iog.) Deductible App.rl The amount you owe for :o A requesc for yoor health insurer or plan to review a health care services your decision or a grievance again. health irx*ranee or plan covers before your healrh Balance Billing insurance or plan begins pavs Hcr plan pavs When a prt:vider bills you for the difference between the to pay.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Bill 337
    LB337 LB337 2021 2021 LEGISLATURE OF NEBRASKA ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH LEGISLATURE FIRST SESSION LEGISLATIVE BILL 337 FINAL READING Introduced by Kolterman, 24. Read first time January 13, 2021 Committee: Banking, Commerce and Insurance 1 A BILL FOR AN ACT relating to prescription drug coverage; to adopt the 2 Step-Therapy Reform Act; and to provide a duty for the Revisor of 3 Statutes. 4 Be it enacted by the people of the State of Nebraska, -1- LB337 LB337 2021 2021 1 Section 1. Sections 1 to 7 of this act shall be known and may be 2 cited as the Step-Therapy Reform Act. 3 Sec. 2. For purposes of the Step-Therapy Reform Act: 4 (1) Clinical practice guidelines means a systematically developed 5 statement to assist decisionmaking by health care providers and decisions 6 by covered persons about appropriate health care for specific clinical 7 circumstances and conditions; 8 (2) Clinical review criteria means the written screening procedures, 9 decision abstracts, clinical protocols, and clinical practice guidelines 10 used by a health carrier or utilization review organization to determine 11 the medical necessity and appropriateness of health care services; 12 (3) Health carrier means an entity subject to the insurance laws and 13 regulations of this state, or subject to the jurisdiction of the Director 14 of Insurance, that contracts or offers to contract to provide, deliver, 15 arrange for, pay for, or reimburse any of the costs of health care 16 services, including a sickness and accident insurance company, a health 17 maintenance organization, a nonprofit hospital and health service 18 corporation, or any other entity providing a plan of health insurance, 19 health benefits, or health care services.
    [Show full text]
  • Engaging Health Care Users: a Framework for Healthy Individuals and Communities
    Engaging Health Care Users: A Framework for Healthy Individuals and Communities A Report of the AHA Committe on Research: Benjamin K. Chu, MD, Cheryl Hoying, PhD, RN co-chair Mary J. Kitchell John G. O’Brien, co-chair Stephen Love Rhonda Anderson, DNSc, FACHE Thomas D. O’Connor Thomas L. Bell T.R. Reid Art Blank Michael G. Rock, MD Mary Blunt Jeff Selberg Pamela S. Brier Anthony L. Spezia Lawrence P. Casalino, MD, PhD David P. Tilton Michael Chernew, PhD Richard J. Umbdenstock Douglas A. Conrad, PhD Lorrie Warner Elaine Couture, MBA, RN Maryjane Wurth Brenita Crawford, DHA Steven I. Goldstein American Hospital Association 2012 Committee on Research Benjamin K. Chu, MD Michael Chernew, PhD Thomas D. O’Connor Committee Co-Chair Professor President Regional President Department of Health Care Policy United Hospital Southern California, Kaiser Foundation Harvard Medical School Hospitals T.R. Reid Douglas A. Conrad, PhD Author John G. O’Brien Professor Committee Co-Chair Department of Health Services Michael G. Rock, MD President and Chief Executive Officer University of Washington Chief Medical Officer UMass Memorial Health Care, Inc. Mayo Clinic Hospitals/Mayo Foundation Elaine Couture, BSN, MBA, RN Rhonda Anderson, DNSc, Chief Executive Officer Jeff Selberg FAAN Providence Sacred Heart Executive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer Medical Center Chief Operating Officer Cardon Children’s Medical Center Institute for Healthcare Improvement Brenita Crawford, DHA Thomas L. Bell Retired Healthcare Executive and Educator Anthony L. Spezia President and Chief Executive Officer President and Chief Executive Officer Kansas Hospital Association Steven I. Goldstein Covenant Health President and Chief Executive Officer Art Blank University of Rochester - Strong Memo- David P.
    [Show full text]