With ever greater frequency, I'm encountering questions regarding California's legislative attempt to create a closed formulary. "What do you think?" is the intentionally loaded question. This is one of those interrogatives that requires unpacking, like a suitcase that's been the companion of a traveler on a long road trip. There are a lot of layers, some messier and more complicated than others. Courage is required to unload the suitcase and it'll take a while to sort through all the laundry. And yes... the "baggage" metaphor is intentional. So much baggage.
Should California adopt a closed formulary?
Of course they should. All state workers' compensation systems should. A well designed formulary, properly implemented, is the best and fastest way to disseminate clinical best practices and contemporary medical evidence throughout the provider community (a community that is, I might add - through no fault of their own - perennially behind the curve on the latest science regarding appropriate, safe, and efficacious use of medications). Doctors and patients clearly benefit from the "guide rails" of a formulary.
What will the California closed formulary look like? How will it work?
I have no idea. No one does. And should you encounter someone that claims to know, tread carefully and remain skeptical. The sausage-making process is in full swing in Sacramento and everyone wants a seat at the table. What's clear at this point is that the usual suspects have taken their predictable positions (Chamber of Commerce likes it, applicant attorneys don't, etc.) Also clear is that each amendment added to the current bill creates significant swings in support. At this point, it's hard to even ascertain the score, much less who has the momentum.
If (emphasis on that word "if) this happens, when will it go into effect?
Likely not until mid-year 2017 at the earliest. Keep in mind that the Texas closed formulary was phased in starting in September of 2011 and applied to legacy claims in September of 2013... after the legislative mandate for the formulary was signed into law via HB 7 in 2005. These things take time.
What will this mean to you?
Well, CWCI says it could mean injured workers are treated more appropriately... to the tune of $120 million - $420 million in annual savings. That's a lot of prescriptions never dispensed... a lot of drugs never taken... a lot of addiction never rearing its ugly head... a lot of injured workers saved from greater pain and suffering brought on by inappropriate treatment.
What are the chances?
Perhaps the most complicated question of all... because it's really two different questions. What are the chances of something passing... something the state calls a "formulary"? Pretty good, I think. What are the chances the resulting regulatory approach really creates a safer medical treatment environment for injured workers that subsequently saves payers millions of dollars? It's possible... but not probable. Like any major legislative/regulatory change, this will be flawed. Let's hope it's not so flawed that it's not worth doing.
Follow us on Twitter @PRIUM1