USP <800> is not subject to any pending appeals and will become official December 1st, 2019. Many facets of USP <800> are intertwined with compounding (<795>/<797>), so the General Chapter will be considered informational and not compendially applicable at this time.
With rare exception, all pharmacies will be responsible for meeting USP standards in General Chapter <800> Hazardous Drugs – Handling in the Healthcare Settings. If your pharmacy plans to prepare compounded prescriptions with Hazardous Drugs (HDs), then you must comply with all elements of the standard, including the extensive containment requirements. If your pharmacy does not plan to compound with HDs but has HDs in inventory (as all traditional pharmacies do), then your responsibilities are greatly reduced, but there are still aspects of USP <800> you must comply with.
USP developed General Chapter <800> to address a public health need to protect healthcare personnel from HDs. Both acute and chronic health issues can arise from improper handling or exposure to HDs. HD handling is not new. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) first published a list of HDs in 2004 and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) first published guidelines for HD handling in 1986 (originally only cytotoxic [antineoplastic] drugs).
Various states have adopted USP <800> into law as they feel it’s the best practice to prevent employee, and public, harm. However, regardless of whether a state has specifically enacted USP <800>, all pharmacies should have robust policies and procedures to handle HDs. OSHA was established to ensure safe and healthful working conditions by setting and enforcing standards and by providing training, outreach, education and assistance.
The following statement was taken from OSHA’s website regarding HDs:
“Institutions should have formal written programs to manage hazards. Such programs should include training, exposure assessment, emergency procedures for spills, policies for managing staff with reproductive concerns, and most importantly, ways to ensure that the institution is adhering to critical national standards.
Although OSHA has no explicit standard, USP 800 focuses explicitly on protecting workers from exposures to hazardous drugs. It, and USP 797, represent professionally expected requirements in healthcare that incorporate national consensus standards on infrastructure maintenance (ASTM).”
OSHA also makes available guidance on Controlling Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Drugs. They have the authority, and resources, to enforce USP <800> for the welfare and safety of pharmacy employees.
PAAS Tips:
- Where to start (not all inclusive):
- Review Applicable USP Chapters
- Download NIOSH HD list
- Establish a qualified/trained individual to be responsible for developing and implementing appropriate standard operating procedures
- Complete an Assessment of Risk for all HDs that are dispensed in the pharmacy. NCPA has made a template available for consideration.
- Obtain Safety Data Sheets for all Hazardous Chemicals
- If you have HDs from the NIOSH list in your inventory that in are in final dosage forms and do not require further manipulation (other than counting or repackaging – unless specified by manufacturer) you may not need to follow all the containment requirements of USP <800>, but should consider the following
- Tablets and capsules may not pose a significant risk of direct occupational exposure; however, dust from tablets/capsules may present a risk of exposure by skin contact or inhalation
- If you do not perform an assessment of risk, all HDs must be handled with containment strategies defined in USP <800>
- Counting or repackaging of HDs must be done carefully. Clean equipment (e.g. counting trays and spatulas) should be dedicated for use with HDs and should be decontaminated after every use.
- Tablet and capsule forms of antineoplastic HDs must not be placed in automated counting or packaging machines, which subject them to stress and may create powdered contaminants.
- Splitting HD tablets (e.g. Warfarin 1 mg) is considered manipulation and should only be done if a pharmacy is in full compliance with USP <800>
- If you plan to compound under USP <795> or <797> using HDs, you must fully comply with USP <800>.
Stop Breaking Insulin Pen Boxes
PAAS National® sent out an URGENT Email Alert February 18, 2020 regarding the FDA’s involvement in the breaking of insulin pen boxes. The pharmacy industry has long debated whether one box of insulin pens is considered “unbreakable”. The debate appeared to be settled January 22nd, 2019 when the U.S. Department of Justice issued a press release stating Walgreens agreed to a $209 million fraud settlement with the federal government regarding its billing and dispensing of insulin pens to Medicaid, Medicare Part D and TRICARE patients. Prior to the settlement, Walgreens’ policy was to not dispense any insulin pens in quantities less than one full box, forcing their staff to falsely understate the days’ supply on thousands of claims. They then enrolled many of these patients on its refill reminder program, causing patients to get early refills. The government labeled that billing activity as widespread FRAUD and required Walgreens to enter into a Corporate Integrity Agreement with the Office of the Inspector General. Consequently, both Walgreens and CVS have been breaking insulin pen boxes when appropriate.
Since that time, PAAS has seen OptumRx, Express Scripts, Humana, Prime Therapeutics, and EnvisionRx dramatically increase their audit recoupments on insulin pens being dispensed that exceed plan limits.
To complicate the matter, the FDA got involved June 20th, 2019 when it sent a “Safety-Related Supplement Request” to Eli Lilly, Sanofi, and Novo Nordisk requesting:
“…updates to the Prescribing Information (PI) and carton labeling to specify that pens be dispensed in the original sealed carton…”
Regardless, it is important to note that PBMs are aware and will likely enforce the revised standard during audits (i.e. do not break insulin pen boxes). PAAS just received audit results where the PBM expected insulin pen boxes to have been broken between 1/22/2019-11/15/2019, and post-11/15/2019 they are expecting full insulin pen boxes to be dispensed. The absurdity is not lost on PAAS, but PBMs will use anything they can to deny paying claims – especially high dollar insulin claims.
Updated Section 16.2 of the package insert, and the exterior carton, will now state to dispense in the original sealed carton. Your supply chain and inventory management will dictate when you start seeing the revised product labeling, if you haven’t already.
16.2 Storage
Dispense in the original sealed carton with the enclosed Instructions for Use.
PAAS Tips:
PAAS Audit Assistance members can visit our Tools & Aids to find updated versions of our popular tip sheets:
Auditors Scrutinize Printed Electronic Prescriptions!
PAAS has observed audit results from Humana where electronic prescriptions are marked as invalid (INVP) due to missing electronic elements. Humana results have stated “Hard copy provided does not contain an electronic physician’s signature, SPI number, Transaction Number, or Message ID.” Software systems often have multiple ways to print an electronic prescription. When a pharmacy prints an electronic prescription for audit purposes, be aware of the electronic prescription requirements and ensure they are present.
PAAS Tips:
OptumRx/SCIO Targeting Part B Drugs & Supplies
In the most recent round of OptumRx/SCIO desk audits, PAAS is seeing audits for test strips, insulin used in a pump, nebulizer solutions, immunosuppressants, chemotherapy medications, and vaccines. If the patient is Medicare-eligible and meets Medicare requirements, these claims should be billed to Medicare Part B. If the pharmacy is processing under a Medicare Advantage plan (Part C), they are required to cover everything that is covered by Part A, B and sometimes D. Some plans require that all drugs and supplies be billed to the prescription benefit and they will process them under either B or D as appropriate. Other plans may require that you bill Part B drugs and supplies to the medical benefit and only Part D to the prescription benefit.
Why do these potential Medicare B claims go through the Part D plan at the point of sale?
PAAS Tips:
Caremark Strictly Enforces Coupon Policy
Caremark Strictly Enforces Coupon Policy
CVS Caremark first updated their policy on the use of manufacturer coupons in May of 2017 and again in September of 2018. Pharmacies continue to suffer full recoupment of claims that were processed to coupons and copay cards in violation of Caremark’s policy. Caremark considers violations to be inappropriate waivers of patient pay amounts, and could result in additional sanctions, including termination.
As defined in the current Provider Manual: “Pharmaceutical Manufacturer Coupon” means any item or mechanism, including but not limited to, paper coupons, copay cards, e-vouchers, mail-in rebates, and electronic coupon codes funded by a manufacturer, repackager, or supplier of pharmaceutical, chemical, or compounding products, that reduces the portion of the Patient Pay Amount that an Eligible Person is required to pay for a Covered Item.
Caremark prohibits the use of any coupon for:
Note: First DataBank (FDB) recently updated their database to list dietary supplements differently than approved drug products.
With USP <795> and <797> on Hiatus, Time to Focus on USP <800>
On September 23rd, USP announced they were postponing the official dates of the revised General Chapters <795> and <797> (and <825> – radiopharmaceuticals). Stakeholders submitted appeals and have now requested further review by an appointed panel. In question are Beyond Use Dating requirements and Alternate Technology Provisions. According to the USP Bylaws, the panel will meet within 90 days. If the standard is upheld, the date for conformance will be reestablished with at least a six-month notice.
USP <800> is not subject to any pending appeals and will become official December 1st, 2019. Many facets of USP <800> are intertwined with compounding (<795>/<797>), so the General Chapter will be considered informational and not compendially applicable at this time.
With rare exception, all pharmacies will be responsible for meeting USP standards in General Chapter <800> Hazardous Drugs – Handling in the Healthcare Settings. If your pharmacy plans to prepare compounded prescriptions with Hazardous Drugs (HDs), then you must comply with all elements of the standard, including the extensive containment requirements. If your pharmacy does not plan to compound with HDs but has HDs in inventory (as all traditional pharmacies do), then your responsibilities are greatly reduced, but there are still aspects of USP <800> you must comply with.
USP developed General Chapter <800> to address a public health need to protect healthcare personnel from HDs. Both acute and chronic health issues can arise from improper handling or exposure to HDs. HD handling is not new. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) first published a list of HDs in 2004 and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) first published guidelines for HD handling in 1986 (originally only cytotoxic [antineoplastic] drugs).
Various states have adopted USP <800> into law as they feel it’s the best practice to prevent employee, and public, harm. However, regardless of whether a state has specifically enacted USP <800>, all pharmacies should have robust policies and procedures to handle HDs. OSHA was established to ensure safe and healthful working conditions by setting and enforcing standards and by providing training, outreach, education and assistance.
The following statement was taken from OSHA’s website regarding HDs:
“Institutions should have formal written programs to manage hazards. Such programs should include training, exposure assessment, emergency procedures for spills, policies for managing staff with reproductive concerns, and most importantly, ways to ensure that the institution is adhering to critical national standards.
Although OSHA has no explicit standard, USP 800 focuses explicitly on protecting workers from exposures to hazardous drugs. It, and USP 797, represent professionally expected requirements in healthcare that incorporate national consensus standards on infrastructure maintenance (ASTM).”
OSHA also makes available guidance on Controlling Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Drugs. They have the authority, and resources, to enforce USP <800> for the welfare and safety of pharmacy employees.
PAAS Tips:
Disputing Humana’s Bogus $5 Administrative Fees
By now, most pharmacies are probably aware of Humana’s $5 administrative fees to correct, what other plans consider, educational discrepancies. We commonly see these fees assessed for incorrect prescriber (for legend drugs), invalid days’ supply, and incorrect origin code. State audit laws have been ineffective at protecting pharmacies from these clerical errors as Humana classifies these takebacks as “Administrative Fees”, not recoupments on the initial claim.
What should your pharmacy do when assessed a $5 fee?Join today!
First, check the claims to make sure Humana is valid in their assertion. PAAS has recently seen numerous audit results where the auditor made a mistake on days’ supply, which was subsequently overturned. Auditors are not immune to mistakes with origin codes or prescribers, either.
- Invalid Days’ Supply: Check the math to make sure the auditor did not make a mistake.
- Wrong Origin Code: Double check the origin code that you billed. Does Humana’s assessment make sense?
- Incorrect Doctor: Check the NPI billed. Is your system set up to correctly link the doctor’s name with their NPI?
- If you find a mistake, use the Humana Corrected Values Form (CVF) to appeal the fee. This CVF should have been included with the result materials.
Reviewing these fees are easy to do and should not be overlooked on appeal. These fees apply to the original fill and all refills, so a prescription with 12 fills can have $60 in fees. These fees are in addition to any discrepancy Humana may be assessing on a claim; which could lead to > 100% recoupment! PAAS recommends you dispute all recoupments, big or small.
PAAS Tips:
Remember to send your results to PAAS to have the best chance during appeal!
Split Billing Opioid Prescriptions
PAAS has received numerous questions related to split-billing opioid prescriptions to insurance and cash. The current state of the opioid crisis has made these claims targets for audit recovery and DEA scrutiny.
PAAS recommends …Join today!
against split billing or processing a claim as cash to circumvent a plan limit or prior authorization requirement. Most limits are based on appropriate clinical use. Bypassing these edits for opioids can lead to overdoses, diversion, and even death. Especially for controlled substances, pharmacists have a corresponding responsibility to ensure that prescriptions are for a legitimate medical purpose 21 CFR 1306.04(a).
- PBMs will monitor and flag claims that are rejected for plan limits and reprocessed with changed quantity and/or days’ supply
- Claims will be recovered in full if billed with the wrong days’ supply and exceed plan limits
- For example, Oxycontin 30 mg #90 1 po TID, plan limit 2/day: billing #60 as 30 days’ supply is incorrect for TID dosing and will likely be recovered in full
- PBMs may have access to state prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) to look for cash claims
- Charging the patient cash can be considered non-compliance with the provider manual and could lead to remediation, including potential network termination
- If you have exhausted all plan options and the patient insists on paying cash for the full prescription, be sure that you document authorization from the patient that they are willing to pay the full cost and will not seek reimbursement from the insurance. This may protect you from accusations of non-compliance.
- Multiple transactions on the PDMP may raise red-flags for state and DEA agents as a possible diversion
- Always call for an override or prior authorization. Most edits can be overridden with appropriate clinical documentation
- Obtaining prior authorization can often resolve the problem for six months to a year
- Prescribers that are unwilling to obtain prior authorization or to change the prescription to a clinically appropriate dose may be a red-flag for diversion
- Don’t be afraid to enlist the patient’s help. Having them file a complaint with their insurance can help expediate the PA approval process.
PAAS Tips:
Prime Recovering Claims on Drug Substitutions
PAAS has seen Prime Therapeutics recover claims for the following reasons:
Inappropriate Billing Practices are discussed in the Prime Provider Manual, Section 2 and Unacceptable Billing Practices are found in Section 6. Here are a few examples:
PAAS Tips:
Pharmacist Sentenced to 10 Years in Prison for Fraud Scheme
Ademola Adebayo was convicted on January 11th, 2019 of conspiracy to commit health care fraud, wire fraud and money laundering. His sentence included 120 months (10 years) in prison followed by three years of supervised release and an order to pay $3.2 million in restitution and $1.4 million in forfeiture.
Adebayo was involved in a $121 million-dollar scheme that submitted false and fraudulent claims to Medicare, TRICARE, and private insurance companies. The claims involved compounded pain and scar creams, as well as other prescription medications that were either not medically necessary, never provided or both.
Adebayo was originally the pharmacist at A to Z Pharmacy in New Port Richey, FL. When the fraud was discovered in 2014 and plan contracts terminated with A to Z Pharmacy, Adebayo became a straw owner of Havana Pharmacy & Discount in Miami, which was used to continue the fraud scheme.
Eight other defendants have also been convicted. Others involved in the scheme admitted to paying kickbacks for prescriptions (and patient information) and physicians signing prescriptions for patients they never saw. All were sentenced to prison from one to fifteen years.
PAAS reminds pharmacies to have comprehensive Fraud, Waste, & Abuse Compliance policies and training. Contact PAAS today for more information on our customized Fraud, Waste, & Abuse and HIPAA Compliance Program at (608) 873-1342 or info@paasnational.com.
Test Claims are Prohibited and Put Pharmacies at Risk
Pharmacies may receive requests to determine if a specific medication is covered on formulary or what the copay will be in the absence of an actual prescription. While this may seem like a harmless request, “test claims” are generally prohibited by third-party payers. If your pharmacy submits a claim to insurance without a prescription, a PBM could cite this as a false claim or even fraud.
Payer concerns with test claims include:
PAAS Tips:
PBM audits for rejected or reversed claims are uncommon but may put your pharmacy at risk.