Photo of Roma Sharma

Roma Sharma

Subscribe to Roma Sharma's Posts

Roma Sharma is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office and a member of the firm’s Health Care Group. Roma primarily works with health care clients seeking to comply with regulations for state and federal health care programs, health care anti-fraud and abuse laws, and licensing laws.

Roma’s work incorporates her Master of Public Health degree in Health Policy as well as her past experiences as an extern at the Office of the General Counsel at the American Medical Association and as an intern at the Illinois Office of the Attorney General, Health Care Bureau.

Contact:Read more about Roma Sharma

The federal government has spent billions to promote adoption and “meaningful use” of health information technology (HIT). There is growing government interest in ensuring that HIT is used to support patient care, but doing so requires electronic exchange of information. Congress, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and States have taken action to identify and prevent “information blocking”—interference with the exchange or use of electronic health information—by health care providers, hospitals, technology developers, and service providers. And there likely will be more guidance, statutory and regulatory changes, and enforcement by federal agencies and states in the coming year.

Congress Requests Information and Takes Action

On December 21, 2014, Congress raised concerns about health information blocking, claiming that such activities “frustrate Congressional intent” under the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, “devalue taxpayer investments,” and make HIT “less valuable and more burdensome” to hospitals and health care providers. Congress urged the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) at HHS to certify only HIT that does not block health information exchange. Congress also requested ONC publish a detailed report on the scope of health information blocking and a strategy to address it, within 90 days.Continue Reading Health Information Blocking Leads to New Requirements and May Lead to Enforcement Actions

On June 17, 2015, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) published a Proposed Rule revising regulations governing the 340B Drug Pricing Program (340B Program) found in 42 C.F.R. Part 10. The Proposed Rule applies to all drug manufacturers that are required to make their drugs available to covered entities under the 340B Program. Notably, it sets forth the calculation of the ceiling price and application of civil monetary penalties. The Proposed Rule does not address concerns that have been expressed by manufacturers about the recent expansion of entities able to be covered entities and the expansion of pharmacy outlets serving those patients. These revisions may indicate HRSA’s interest in more stringent compliance by manufacturers of drugs that are eligible for 340B Program pricing. Comments to the Proposed Rule are due August 17, 2015.

340B CEILING PRICE

The Proposed Rule provides that a manufacturer must calculate the ceiling price for all of its covered outpatient drugs on a quarterly basis. The ceiling price is calculated by subtracting the unit rebate amount (URA) from the average manufacturer price (AMP) for the smallest unit of measure and will be calculated using six decimal places. The number is then multiplied by the drug’s package size and case package.

PENNY PRICING AND DISTRIBUTION

To address the situation where the URA equals the AMP, resulting in a $0.00 per unit of measure 340B ceiling price, HRSA proposes that a manufacturer charge $0.01 per unit of measure for a drug with a ceiling price below $0.01. For those 340B drugs whose calculated price is less than $0.01, the effective ceiling price will be $0.01 per unit of measure. Prices for 340B products must be based on the immediately preceding calendar quarter pricing data.Continue Reading HRSA Proposes Rule on 340B Ceiling Pricing, Removes Orphan Drug Regulations and Sets Forth Civil Monetary Penalties