Washington Evening Journal
111 North Marion Avenue
Washington, IA 52353
319-653-2191
Drug discount program may hurt rural hospitals
By Sarah Jane Tribble, KFF Health News
Jun. 3, 2024 7:59 am
Facing ongoing concerns about rural hospital closures, Capitol Hill lawmakers have introduced a spate of proposals to fix a federal program created to keep lifesaving services in small towns nationwide.
In Anamosa, Iowa — a town of fewer than 6,000 residents located more than 900 miles from the nation’s capital — rural hospital leader Eric Briesemeister is watching for Congress’ next move. The 22-bed hospital Briesemeister runs averages about seven inpatients each night, and its most recent federal filings show it earned just $95,445 in annual net income from serving patients.
Yet Briesemeister isn’t interested in converting the facility into a rural emergency hospital, which would mean getting millions of extra dollars each year from federal payments. In exchange for that financial support, hospitals that join the program keep their emergency departments open and give up inpatient beds.
“It wasn’t for us,” said Briesemeister, chief executive of UnityPoint Health-Jones Regional Medical Center. “I think that program is a little bit more designed for hospitals that might not be around without it.”
Nationwide, only about two dozen of the more than 1,500 eligible hospitals have become rural emergency hospitals since the program launched last year. At the same time, rural hospitals continue to close — 10 since the fix became available.
Rural emergency hospitals are required to meet applicable state licensing, staffing, educational training and scope of practice requirements. State legislatures have an important role to play. Iowa enacted a law last year enabling rural emergency licensure.
Federal lawmakers have introduced a handful of legislative solutions since March. In one bill, senators from Kansas and Minnesota list a myriad of tactics, including allowing older closed facilities to reopen.
Another proposal introduced in the House by two Michigan lawmakers is the Rural 340B Access Act. It would allow rural emergency hospitals to use the 340B federal drug discount program, which Congress created in 1992.
The 340B program, named after its federal statute, lets eligible hospitals and clinics buy drugs at a discount and then bill insurance companies, Medicare, or Medicaid at market rates. Hospitals get to keep the money they make from the difference.
Briesemeister said the 340B federal drug discount program “can be used for tremendous good.” The small-town hospital uses money it makes from 340B to subsidize emergency services and uninsured and underinsured patients who frequent the emergency department, he said.
Chuck Grassley, Iowa’s longtime Republican senator, shepherded the Rural Emergency Hospital program into law. His spokesperson, Gillie Maddox, did not respond directly to questions about why the federal law creating rural emergency hospitals omitted the 340B program. Instead, Maddox said the designation was a “product of bipartisan negotiations.”
A survey conducted by the health analytics and consulting firm Chartis, along with the National Rural Health Association, found that nearly 80% of rural hospitals had participated in 340B and nearly 40% said they reaped $750,000 or more annually from the program.
While many rural hospitals are clamoring for the 340B provision to be added to the rural emergency hospital program, opponents have said 340B can be a cash cow for hospitals that don’t serve enough vulnerable patients.
Nicole Longo is deputy vice president of public affairs for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the nation’s largest, most influential pharmaceutical lobbying group. She wrote in a recent blog post that hospital systems and chain pharmacies are “exploiting the program” and said patients have not benefited from the growth in the program.