Legislation Updates

New Hampshire and New York: Legislative Update

Apr 12, 2017  |  Jessica Behrendsen

New York and New Hampshire continue to enhance and clarify their regulatory intent around electronic solutions for both electronic prior authorization (ePA) and electronic prescribing (E-Prescribing). Both states have released details that have an impact on stakeholders engaged in ePA and E-Prescribing. Following are relevant updates.

New Hampshire

On March 8, New Hampshire officially adopted a universal PA form as required by HB1608. Congratulations to the state for moving forward and adopting a uniform form. We were fortunate to be a part of the process and help provide expertise to the New Hampshire Insurance Department.

A universal form is better than multiple forms, which creates confusion and delays, but as we’ve noted previously, ePA is the most expeditious process when it comes to getting patients the medication they need to live healthy lives so we and other stakeholders in the industry are excited the New Hampshire law also permits the utilization of ePA via the NCPDP SCRIPT Standard.

New York

New York’s Health Commissioner, Howard Zucker, MD, JD. announced on March 2, they will continue to waive the following exceptional circumstances from the requirements in regards to E-Prescribing.

  1. any practitioner prescribing a controlled or non-controlled substance, containing two (2) or more products, which is compounded by a pharmacist;
  2. any practitioner prescribing a controlled or non-controlled substance to be compounded for the direct administration to a patient by parenteral, intravenous, intramuscular, subcutaneous or intraspinal infusion;
  3. any practitioner prescribing a controlled or non-controlled substance that contains long or complicated directions;
  4. any practitioner prescribing a controlled or non-controlled substance that requires a prescription to contain certain elements required by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that are not able to be accomplished with electronic prescribing;
  5. any practitioner prescribing a controlled or non-controlled substance under approved protocols for expedited partner therapy, collaborative drug management or comprehensive medication management, or in response to a public health emergency that would allow a non-patient specific prescription;
  6. any practitioner prescribing an opioid antagonist that would allow a non- patient specific prescription;
  7. any practitioner prescribing a controlled or non-controlled substance under a research protocol;
  8. a pharmacist dispensing controlled and non-controlled substance compounded prescriptions, prescriptions containing long or complicated directions, and prescriptions containing certain elements required by the FDA or any other governmental agency that are not able to be accomplished with electronic prescribing;
  9. a pharmacist dispensing prescriptions issued under a research protocol, or under approved protocols for expedited partner therapy, or for collaborative drug management or comprehensive medication management; and
  10. a pharmacist dispensing non-patient specific prescriptions, including opioid antagonists, or prescriptions issued in response to a declared public health emergency.

CoverMyMeds is a partner of the National Council for Prescription Drug Program (NCPDP) with more than 20 staff actively participating in task groups to continue to address these ten issues that have been brought up by Commissioner Zucker.

For questions or additional information reach out to Kim Diehl-Boyd of our Government Affairs team at kdiehlboyd@covermymeds.com.

Share this article on Facebook Share this article on Twitter Share this article on LinkedIn Share this article via email