July 9, 2013—Three associations that represent a broad group of hospitals in the 340B drug discount program joined together today to highlight how the program “benefits vulnerable patients, including those with little or no ability to pay.”[ms-protect-content id=”2799”]
During a call with health care reporters, Safety Net Hospitals for Pharmaceutical Access (SNHPA) unveiled a 27-page report entitled Setting the Record Straight on 340B: A Response to Critics and a companion website, 340BFacts.com. Leaders of America’s Essential Hospitals (formerly the National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems) and the National Rural Health Association (NRHA) spoke along with SNHPA during the media briefing.
The report says the 340B program continues to meet Congress’ intent of “enabling safety net hospitals and other health care providers to stretch their scarce resources, serve more vulnerable patients, and provide more comprehensive services.”
“The 340B program strengthens the health care safety net, allowing vulnerable patients to access medicine and health care services they need to stay out of the hospital,” said SNHPA President and Chief Executive Officer Ted Slafsky. “Without the 340B program, many safety net hospitals would have to limit services or even close their pharmacy doors. As a result, patients would lose access to health care and communities would suffer. The cost of 340B to the pharmaceutical industry is negligible compared to its benefits.” The program, he said, represents just 2 percent of the $325 billion U.S. market.
“Thousands of vulnerable patients today have access to needed medications and other vital services as a result of 340B,” said Dr. Bruce Siegel, President and CEO of America’s Essential Hospitals. “Without 340B, these patients likely would be sicker and more costly, and the hospitals on which they depend would have fewer resources to help them.”
Maggie Elehwany, NRHA Vice President of Government Affairs and Policy, added, “The 340B program has been a lifesaver for rural Americans and hospitals facing significant financial challenges. Thanks to the program, patients can access affordable medications including chemotherapy and other critical services close to home.”
Slafsky said opportunities exist to modernize the 20-year-old 340B program and that hospitals are eager to work with Congress, the drug industry, and other stakeholders. The report includes a number of recommendations including greater pricing transparency and a review of the contract pharmacy program. “The 340B program is a privilege granted by Congress and is financed by the drug industry, we look forward to working with all parties to make the program even more effective,” said SNHPA’s Slafsky.
The report states that “government and other studies have confirmed many times that 340B providers are using their program savings to benefit their vulnerable patients, consistent with congressional intent.” It said examples include:
- Providing medications free of charge or at lower cost to patients;
- Establishing programs to help patients use medications properly;
- Expanding access to expensive chemotherapy drugs, and maintaining patient access to medications by providing longer pharmacy hours and other services benefiting vulnerable patients;
- Caring for more patients; and
- Offsetting losses from providing uncompensated care.
The report also says that 340B “reduces government expenditures and reduces the burden on taxpayers who would otherwise be responsible for financing the indigent care that 340B hospitals provide.”
SNHPA says that, in creating 340B, Congress did not make “a particular patient category eligible for the program.”
“Rather,” it says, “the program makes safety-net providers eligible for the program because of their dedicated health care services to low-income and vulnerable patient populations. The law requires that the discounted drugs only be provided to patients of the covered entity. The law does not require that discounted drugs only be provided to uninsured patients or that program savings only be used to lower the cost of drugs for uninsured patients, as some critics have suggested.”[/ms-protect-content]