BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 1095 Page 1 Date of Hearing: June 12, 2012 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND CONSUMER PROTECTION Mary Hayashi, Chair SB 1095 (Rubio) - As Introduced: February 16, 2012 SENATE VOTE : 35-0 SUBJECT : Pharmacy: clinics. SUMMARY : Authorizes outpatient settings and ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) to purchase drugs at wholesale for administering and dispensing to their patients. Specifically, this bill : 1)Revises and recasts the authorization for the Board of Pharmacy (Board) to issue a license for the wholesale purchase of drugs to a "surgical clinic," to instead refer to the license being issued to a "clinic," and defines "clinic" to mean any of the following: a) A surgical clinic licensed pursuant to state Health and Safety Code; b) An outpatient setting accredited by an accreditation agency, as defined in state Health and Safety Code; or, c) An ASC certified to participate in the Medicare Program pursuant to federal law. 2)Deletes a provision stating that no clinic shall operate without a license issued by the Board, but retains provisions requiring a clinic to be licensed by the Board in order to be entitled to purchase drugs at wholesale, and allowing the Board to inspect those clinics at any time in order to determine whether a clinic is operating in compliance with the law. 3)Specifies that the provisions above shall not limit the ability of a physician and surgeon or a group medical practice to prescribe, dispense, administer, or furnish drugs at a clinic, as specified. 4)Makes conforming changes. SB 1095 Page 2 EXISTING LAW 1)Provides for the licensure and regulation of the practice of pharmacy under the Pharmacy Law by the Board within the Department of Consumer Affairs. 2)Authorizes the Board to issue a license to a surgical clinic to purchase drugs to administer or dispense to the clinic's patients, as specified. 3)Authorizes a licensed surgical clinic to purchase drugs at wholesale prices to administer or dispense to patients registered for care at the clinic and limits the administration or dispensing of surgical clinic drugs to drugs that control pain and nausea, and prohibits drugs from being dispensed in amounts greater than that required to meet the patient's needs for 72 hours. 4)Authorizes surgical clinics to purchase and distribute such drugs only after being licensed to do so by the Board, as specified, and requires surgical clinics to keep records as to the kind and amount of drugs purchased, administered, and dispensed, for at least three years. 5)Requires a surgical clinic that is licensed to purchase and provide such drugs to notify the Board of any proposed changes in ownership or beneficial interest, as specified. 6)Authorizes the Board to inspect a clinic at any time in order to determine the clinic's compliance with the law. 7)Requires surgical clinics to be licensed and certified by the Department of Public Health (DPH). 8)Defines a surgical clinic as a clinic that is not part of a hospital, and that provides ambulatory surgical care for patients who remain less than 24 hours. 9)Defines an outpatient setting as any facility, clinic, office, or other setting that is not part of a general acute care hospital, where anesthesia is used in compliance with the community standard of practice. 10)Prohibits the operation of an outpatient setting, including a SB 1095 Page 3 surgical clinic, unless the setting is licensed by DPH, certified to participate in the Medicare program, as specified, or accredited by an accreditation agency approved by the Medical Board of California (MBC). 11)Requires the MBC to adopt standards for accreditation of outpatient settings, as defined, and in approving accreditation agencies to perform accreditation of outpatient settings, ensure that the certification program shall, at a minimum, include standards for specified aspects of settings' operations. 12)Defines an ASC as an ambulatory surgical center certified to participate in the Medicare Program under Title XVIII of the federal Social Security Act. FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown COMMENTS : Purpose of this bill . According to the author, "In 2007, the California Court of Appeal ruled in Capen v. Shewry to prohibit DPH from licensing ASCs that are either partially or fully owned by a physician, even if the physician-owned ASC is properly accredited and Medicare certified. Without proper licensure from DPH, the Board cannot grant the ASC a license to purchase medications wholesale. "Current law is problematic because approximately 90% of ASCs have some type of physician ownership. As a result of the Capen v. Shewry decision, physicians that own ASCs incur a significant liability by having to purchase drugs at retail prices. This bill provides physician-owned ASCs the proper licensing necessary to administer high quality care by allowing them to purchase certain drugs wholesale and store them on site." Background . ASCs are health care facilities that specialize in providing surgery, pain management and certain diagnostic services in an outpatient setting. Since the first ASC was established in 1970, many procedures that used to be performed exclusively in hospitals began taking place in ASCs, such as knee, shoulder, eye, spine, and other surgeries. Most ASCs are licensed, certified by Medicare and accredited by one of the major health care accrediting organizations. Stand-alone ASCs rarely have a single owner and most involve at least some SB 1095 Page 4 physician ownership. Physician partners who perform surgeries in the center will often own at least some part of the facility, but ownership percentages vary considerably. Some ASCs are entirely physician-owned and some have a development or management company that owns a percentage of a center. The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) develops conditions of participation and conditions for coverage, which are minimum standards a health care organization must meet in order to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Certification as a surgical clinic is limited to any distinct entity that operates exclusively for purposes of providing surgical services to patients who don't require hospitalization. A surgical clinic can be hospital-operated or independent. However, it must be physically and administratively distinct from other operations of the hospital and be able to identify its costs separately from other hospital costs. According to CMS, covered procedures performed in certified ASCs are those that generally do not exceed 90 minutes and do not require more than four hours recovery or convalescent time. The surgical clinic may not perform a surgical procedure on a Medicare beneficiary when, before surgery, an overnight hospital stay is anticipated. Anticipated extended care in a non-hospital health care setting as a result of a particular procedure is not a covered surgical clinic procedure for Medicare beneficiaries. Physicians are prohibited by law from performing specified outpatient surgeries, unless they are performed in a licensed or accredited setting. The law also specifies that certain outpatient surgery settings are excluded from the accreditation requirement, such as surgery clinics certified to participate in the Medicare program and licensed surgical clinics. Physicians who perform surgery under specified anesthesia levels in unlicensed settings that are also not Medicare-certified, such as their offices, must seek accreditation from one of the accreditation agencies approved by MBC. Under existing law, a surgical clinic must comply with all applicable laws and regulations of the DPH and the Board relating to drug distribution to ensure that inventories, security procedures, training, protocol development, recordkeeping, packaging, labeling, dispensing, and patient consultation are carried out in a manner that is consistent with the promotion and protection of the health and safety of the SB 1095 Page 5 public. In 2007, a California appellate court ruled that ASCs owned, in whole or in part, by physicians would no longer be eligible for licensure by the DPH. The court found, in part: "The regulatory authority (of DPH) over licensed surgical clinics extends to the establishment of minimum standards of safety for the surgical clinic facility and its equipment and to the setting of minimum standards of staffing?In 1994 the Legislature delegated authority to the MBC to provide for the accreditation and setting of standards for unlicensed surgical clinics employing general anesthesia, including standards for the safety of the facility and its equipment and the adequacy and training of its personnel?It did so because it found 'that in this state, significant surgeries are being performed in unregulated out-of-hospital settings?' "In this manner the Legislature divided the oversight of the safety of surgical clinics between two different agencies of government, primarily distinguished by the ownership and operation of the clinic by one or more physicians since that is the circumstance that excludes a clinic from licensing by DPH and thereby makes possible regulation by MBC. "Under our previous reading of (Health and Safety Code) section 1204 DPH's licensing authority was dependent on whether the clinic was owned and operated by one, as distinguished from more-than-one physician, in group practice. However, it makes little policy sense to separate the regulation of physician owned and operated clinics on that basis, given the MBC's general jurisdiction over the practice of physicians and specific jurisdiction over the safety of surgical clinics not licensed by DPH. The simple interpretive policy we derive is that physician owned and operated surgical clinics are to be regulated by MBC and surgical clinics operated by non-physicians are to be regulated by DPH, a determination involving the statutory allocation of responsibility that is not within the expertise of either agency. "Accordingly, we resolve the ambiguity in section 1204, subdivision (b)(1), by reading it to exclude physician owned and operated surgical clinics from?licensing by DPH, leaving them, when using general anesthesia, to accreditation and regulation by MBC." SB 1095 Page 6 As a result of this ruling, the DPH ceased licensure activities of ASCs owned by physicians, although it continued to perform Medicare certification for these facilities. Prior to the Capen v. Shewry ruling, DPH interpreted the exemption from licensure in law for physician-owned clinics to mean that each licensed health care practitioner at the clinic had to have at least some share in the ownership (or leasehold) and operation of the clinic. The DPH interpreted the law in this way to ensure that a practitioner at the clinic could not disclaim responsibility for its operation should a problem arise. Since the ruling, DPH is not renewing or granting any licenses to a surgical clinic with any degree of physician ownership, but it continues to certify these centers for Medicare purposes. Support . The Medical Board of California states, "This bill would resolve an unintended consequence created by a 2007 court decision that resulted in physician owned outpatient settings not being eligible to obtain a limited license from the Board of Pharmacy, because they could no longer be licensed by DPH. This bill would allow accredited and certified surgery centers to obtain a license from the Board of Pharmacy, which will permit accredited surgery centers to purchase medication at wholesale and safely store the medication in a centralized location in the surgery center." Opposition . The California State Board of Pharmacy has offered amendments that "would ensure adequate regulatory oversight of comingled drug stocks at these clinics, and would authorize the Board to inspect a clinic to determine compliance with applicable laws, whether or not the clinic is licensed by the Board." Previous legislation . SB 100 (Price), Chapter 645, Statutes of 2011, requires MBC to adopt regulations on physician availability within clinics using laser or intense pulse light devices for elective cosmetic surgery, makes a number of changes regarding the approval, oversight and inspection of "outpatient settings," and revises the existing definition of "outpatient settings" to include fertility clinics that offer in vitro fertilization. AB 847 (Bonnie Lowenthal) of 2011 was substantially identical to SB 1095. This bill was held in Assembly Health Committee. SB 1095 Page 7 AB 2292 (Bonnie Lowenthal) of 2010 allows the Board to grant a limited license to a clinic that is certified as an ASC for participation in the Medicare program or accredited as an outpatient setting to allow them to purchase drugs at wholesale, as specified. This bill was held in Assembly Appropriations Committee. AB 832 (Jones) of 2009 requires DPH to convene a workgroup to develop recommendations regarding the oversight of ASCs to address issues raised in Capen v. Shewry. This bill was held in Assembly Appropriations Committee. AB 1574 (Plescia) of 2008 contains similar provisions to those proposed in AB 2292 and requires the Board to inspect outpatient settings and ASCs within 120 days of issuing a clinic license and at least annually thereafter. This bill was vetoed by the Governor, who stated, "The bill failed to address the larger issue concerning the Capen v. Shewry ruling." AB 2122 (Plescia) of 2008 requires surgical clinics to meet specified licensing requirements, including compliance with Medicare conditions of participation and contains provisions nearly identical to those proposed in AB 1574. This bill was held in Assembly Appropriations Committee. AB 543 (Plescia) of 2007 requires surgical clinics to meet specified operating and staffing standards, limit surgical procedures, and develop and implement policies and procedures consistent with Medicare conditions of participation, including interpretive guidelines. This bill was vetoed by the Governor, who stated that the bill did not establish appropriate time limits for performing surgery under general anesthesia, inappropriately restricted administrative flexibility, and created fiscal pressure during ongoing budget challenges. AB 2308 (Plescia) of 2006 requires DPH to convene a workgroup to develop licensing criteria to protect surgical clinic patients, and replaces the term "licensed surgical clinic" with "ambulatory surgical centers." This bill was vetoed by the Governor, who stated, "The bill did not establish clear licensing standards for surgical clinics." AB 595 (Speier), Chapter 1276, Statutes of 1994, requires that certain outpatient settings, including surgical clinics, be SB 1095 Page 8 licensed by the state, be Medicare certified, or be accredited by an agency approved by the MBC. Double referred . This bill is double-referred to Assembly Health Committee. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support California Ambulatory Surgery Association (sponsor) Advanced Eye Surgery Center Airport Endoscopy Center AmSurg Corp Aspen Surgery Center Brentwood Surgery Center Carlsbad Surgery Center Coast Surgery Center Endoscopy Center of the Central Coast Glendora Digestive Disease Institute Golden Triangle Surgicenter Hacienda Surgery Center Hope Square Surgical Center La Jolla Endoscopy Center La Jolla Orthopaedic Surgery Center Lynn Eye Surgery Center Medical Board of California Millennium Surgery Center Mission Valley Heights Surgery Center Oasis Surgery Center OtayLakes Surgery Center Pacific Hills Surgery Center Peninsula Eye Surgery Center Physicians Plaza Surgical Center Pleasanton Surgery Center Providence Summit Surgery Center Redding Endoscopy Center Southwest Surgical Center Surgical Care Affiliates Sutter Alhambra Surgery Center Sutter Health Surgery Center Division Torrance Surgery Center United Surgical Partners Westlake Eye Surgery Center One individual SB 1095 Page 9 Opposition California State Board of Pharmacy Analysis Prepared by : Angela Mapp / B.,P. & C.P. / (916) 319-3301