Healthcare (Hospitals)

SB 846 - This act enacts provisions relating to insurance coverage of pharmacy services. CLINICIAN-ADMINISTERED DRUGS (Section 376.411) This act provides that a health carrier or pharmacy benefits manager (PBM) shall not impose any penalty, impediment, differentiation, or limitation on participating providers for providing medically necessary clinician-administered drugs, regardless of whether the participating provider obtains the drugs from an in-network provider, including but not limited to refusing to approve or pay, or reimbursing less than the contracted payment amount. Carriers and PBMs shall not impose any penalty, impediment, differentiation, or limitation on a covered person who is administered medically necessary clinician-administered drugs, regardless of whether the participating provider obtains the drugs from an in-network provider, including but not limited to: limiting coverage or benefits; requiring an additional fee, higher co-payment, or higher coinsurance amount; or interfering with a patient's ability to obtain a clinician-administered drug from the patient's provider or pharmacy of choice by any means, including but not limited to inducing, steering, or offering financial or other incentives. Carriers and PBMs shall not impose any penalty, impediment, differentiation, or limitation on any pharmacy that is dispensing medically necessary clinician-administered drugs, regardless of whether the participating provider obtains the drugs from an in-network provider, including but not limited to requiring a pharmacy to dispense the drugs to a patient with the intention that the patient will transport the medication to a health care provider for administration. These provisions shall not apply if the clinician-administered drug is not otherwise covered by the carrier or PBM. These provisions are identical to provisions in SB 13 (2025), the introduced SB 751 (2024), HCS/HB 2267 (2024), SB 26 (2023), HCS/HB 198 (2023), SB 1129 (2022), and HB 2305 (2022), and similar to provisions in SB 921 (2022), SB 1129 (2022), and HB 2305 (2022). REFERENCE PRODUCTS AND BIOSIMILARS (Section 376.415) A health carrier or PBM providing coverage for a reference product or a biological product that is biosimilar to the reference product shall provide coverage for the reference product and all biological products that have been deemed biosimilar to the reference product. The scope, extent, and amount of the required coverage shall be the same, including but not limited to any payment limitations or cost-sharing obligations. These provisions are identical to provisions in SB 13 (2025), the introduced SB 751 (2024), HCS/HB 2267 (2024), SB 26 (2023), HCS/HB 198 (2023), SB 1129 (2022), and HB 2305 (2022), and similar to provisions in SB 921 (2022), SB 1129 (2022), and HB 2305 (2022). 340B DRUG PRICING PROGRAM (Section 376.416) Under this act, no health carrier or pharmacy benefits manager (PBM) shall discriminate against a covered entity or a pharmacy, as such terms are defined in the act, by: • Reimbursing a covered entity or pharmacy for a quantity of a 340B drug, as defined in the act, in an amount less than the carrier, PBM, or affiliate would pay to any other similarly situated pharmacy for such quantity of the drug on the basis that the entity or pharmacy is a covered entity or a pharmacy, or that the entity or pharmacy dispenses 340B drugs. (Section 376.416.2(1)); • Imposing any terms or conditions on covered entities or pharmacies which differ from the terms or conditions applicable to other similarly situated pharmacies or entities on the basis that the entity or pharmacy is a covered entity or dispenses 340B drugs, including but not limited to certain terms and conditions described in the act. (Section 376.416.2(2)); • Interfering with an individual's choice to receive a 340B drug from a covered entity or pharmacy. (Section 376.416.2(3)); • Discriminating in reimbursement to a covered entity or pharmacy based on the determination or indication a drug is a 340B drug. (Section 376.416.2(4)); • Requiring a covered entity or pharmacy to identify a 340B drug sooner than 45 days after the point of sale of the drug. (Section 376.416.2(5)); • Refusing to contract with a covered entity or pharmacy for reasons other than those that apply equally to entities or pharmacies that are not covered entities or similarly situated pharmacies, or on the basis that the entity or pharmacy is a covered entity as described under federal law, or on the basis that the entity or pharmacy is described as a covered entity under provisions of federal law. (Section 376.416.2(6)); • Denying the covered entity the ability to purchase drugs at 340B program pricing by substituting a rebate discount. (Section 376.416.2(7)); • Refusing to cover drugs purchased under the 340B drug pricing program. (Section 376.416.2(8)); or • Requiring a covered entity or pharmacy to reverse, resubmit, or clarify a 340B-drug pricing claim after the initial adjudication unless these actions are in the normal course of pharmacy business and not related to the 340B drug pricing, except as required by federal law. (Section 376.416.2(9)). The Director of the Department of Commerce and Insurance shall impose a civil penalty on any health carrier or PBM violating certain provisions of the act, not to exceed $5,000 per violation per day. (Section 376.416.3). These provisions are identical to provisions in SB 13 (2025), and similar to provisions in SB 372 (2025), HB 784 (2025), HB 785 (2025), HB 943 (2025), the introduced SB 751 (2024), SCS/SBs 978 & 1035 (2024), SB 1213 (2024), HCS/HB 2267 (2024), HB 1977 (2024), SB 26 (2023), HCS/HB 198 (2023), SB 426 (2023), HB 197 (2023), SB 921 (2022), HCS/HB 1677 (2022), SB 1129 (2022), and HB 2305 (2022). PRIOR AUTHORIZATION OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES (Sections 376.2100, 376.2102, 376.2104, 376.2106, and 376.2108) This act enacts provisions relating to prior authorization of health care services. Beginning January 1, 2027, health care providers shall not be required to obtain prior authorization for a health care service unless the health carrier or utilization review entity determines that in the most recent evaluation period, as defined in the act, less than 90% of the prior authorization requests submitted by that provider for that health care service were approved or would have been approved. Also beginning January 1, 2027, health care providers shall not be required to obtain prior authorization for any health care services unless the health carrier or utilization review entity has approved or would have approved less than 90% of all prior authorization requests submitted by that provider for health care services. Health carriers or utilization review entities may elect to have certain hospitals determine which of certain conditions, laid out in the act, the hospital will comply with in order to obtain a prior authorization exemption under the act. Exemptions from prior authorization under the act shall not apply to: pharmacy services, not to exceed the amount of $100,000; imaging services, not to exceed $100,000; cosmetic procedures that are not medically necessary; or investigative or experimental treatments. Maximum dollar amounts for these exceptions shall be adjusted annually for inflation as described in the act. The act further specifies certain prior authorization requests that shall not be included in making determinations under the act, specifies identification methods for the providers, includes provisions for the auditing and retraction of determinations under the act, allows for health carriers and utilization review entities to require providers to use an online portal to submit prior authorization requests, requires adverse determinations under the act to be reviewed by a clinical peer of the provider, and requires a grace period for patients who have received prior authorization for a 90-day supply of medication. Health carriers and utilization review entities shall notify providers within 25 days after a determination is made under the act, shall include in the notification certain information used in making the determination, shall establish an appeals process for the providers, and shall maintain an online prior authorization portal as described in the act. No health carrier or utilization review entity shall deny or reduce payment to a health care provider for a health care service for which the provider has prior authorization, except as described in the act. These provisions shall not apply to MO HealthNet services not provided through a managed care organization, or to providers who have not participated in a health benefit plan offered by the health carrier for at least one full evaluation period. These provisions are identical to provisions contained in SB 841 (2026), SB 13 (2025), HCS/SS#2/SB 79 (2025), HB 618 (2025), and similar to SB 897 (2026), HCS/HB 3010 (2026), HB 1675 (2026), SB 230 (2025), SB 751 (2024), SB 983 (2024), HB 1976 (2024), HB 2267 (2024), SB 576 (2023), and HB 1045 (2023). TAYLOR MIDDLETON

This bill establishes insurance coverage provisions for orthotic, prosthetic, and assistive devices for individuals enrolled in Missouri's MO HealthNet program, which provides health care to low-income residents. The legislation outlines specific payment rules and coverage limits for various health services, including hospital care, physician services, prescription drugs, and home health care, while explicitly excluding certain providers like abortion facilities from receiving funds. Key provisions include setting payment amounts at no more than 80% of reasonable costs for outpatient services, limiting chiropractic visits to 20 per year, and restricting nursing home coverage for those with significant home equity. The bill also defines eligibility criteria and payment methodologies for different types of care, ensuring services are medically necessary and aligned with federal regulations.

SB 1469 - This act requires that the fee for the professional component of clinical pathology services shall be paid by MO HealthNet for professional services provided by a hospital-based pathologist for inpatient clinical pathology services rendered to MO HealthNet patients. The reimbursement shall be set at thirty percent of the approved outpatient simplified fee schedule based on Medicare's clinical laboratory fee schedule, as described in the act. This act is identical to provisions in HB 1599 (2025), HCS/SB 94 (2025), and SCS/HCS/HB 943 (2025) and substantially similar to provisions in the truly agreed to and finally passed SS/SCS/HCS/HB 2372 (2026) and SS/SCS/SB 841 (2026). SARAH HASKINS

SB 1221 - This act creates the "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act". Under this act, a child born alive during or after an abortion or attempted abortion shall have the same rights, privileges, and immunities as any other person, citizen, and resident of Missouri, including any other live-born child. Any licensed, registered, or certified health care provider present at the time a child is born alive during or after an abortion or attempted abortion shall exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious provider would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age or fetal weight, as well as ensure that the child is transported and admitted to a hospital following such care if necessary. A person shall be civilly liable under this act when he or she: (1) knowingly, recklessly, or negligently causes the death of a child born alive during or after an abortion or attempted abortion; (2) knowingly fails to comply with the health care provider standards of care described in this act; (3) knowingly performs or induces, or attempts to perform or induce, an unlawful abortion; (4) knowingly aids or abets another person to undergo a self-induced abortion or attempted self-induced abortion or to procure an unlawful abortion or attempted unlawful abortion; (5) knowingly, recklessly, or negligently supplies or makes available any instrument, device, medicine, drug, or any other means or substance for another person to undergo a self-induced abortion or attempted self-induced abortion or to procure an unlawful abortion or attempted unlawful abortion; or (6) knowingly incites, solicits, or otherwise uses speech or writing as an integral part of conduct in violation of a valid criminal statute to influence another person to undergo a self-induced abortion or attempted self-induced abortion or to procure an unlawful abortion or attempted unlawful abortion. A cause of action for personal injury, bodily injury, or wrongful death may be brought if injury or death arises out of or results from any of these circumstances to: (1) a person upon whom an unlawful abortion or attempted unlawful abortion was performed or induced; (2) a person who underwent a self-induced abortion or attempted self-induced abortion or who procured an unlawful abortion or attempted unlawful abortion; (3) a child who was born alive during or after an abortion or attempted abortion; or (4) an unborn child. In a cause of action for wrongful death, the spouse, partner, parents, and children of the deceased person, child, or unborn child shall be entitled to bring the action and receive damages, attorney fees, and other costs as described in the act. A defendant may not plead or prove a defense that the plaintiff or deceased person assumed or otherwise consented to certain risks involving self-induced or unlawful abortions or attempted self-induced or unlawful abortions. No person shall maintain a cause of action or receive an award of damages under this act if the person engaged in criminal conduct, domestic violence, or sexual assault that caused the pregnancy, or who is a family or household member who aided or abetted in the criminal conduct, domestic violence, or sexual assault. This act is identical to SB 702 (2025), substantially similar to provisions in the truly agreed to and finally passed SS#2/SB 999 (2026), HCS/HBs 1667 & 2294 (2026), HB 195 (2025), SCS/SB 753 (2022), provisions in SCS/HCS/HB 2012 (2022), HCS/HBs 1593 & 1959 (2022), SB 168 (2021), and SB 665 (2020), and similar to SB 388 (2019). SARAH HASKINS

This bill (SB 1070) has no substantive details provided in its official abstract or recent actions. The abstract simply states it "creates provisions relating to illegal aliens" without specifying any mechanisms, requirements, or affected groups. As it is currently in the early prefiled stage (with only a first reading), no concrete policy changes or key provisions have been described or made public. Without further legislative details, it is not possible to summarize its specific impact or provisions.

HB 3475 would allow Vernon County to seek voter approval for a 1% sales tax on retail purchases within the county, specifically to fund hospital operations. The tax requires a majority vote in a county election and must be listed separately on receipts. If approved, the revenue would go exclusively to hospital services, deposited into a dedicated trust fund managed by the state. The bill does not impose the tax automatically - it only enables the process for Vernon County residents to decide through a vote.

HB 3282 modifies Missouri law governing peer review committees in healthcare. The bill strengthens confidentiality for peer review proceedings - protecting interviews, reports, and deliberations from court discovery or testimony - unless a committee sues to revoke a provider's hospital privileges. It also grants immunity from civil liability to committee members and hospital leaders acting in good faith during quality reviews. These changes directly affect healthcare professionals, hospitals, and health maintenance organizations operating under Missouri's peer review system.

SB 1695 protects the confidentiality of peer review committee discussions and findings for health care professionals like doctors, nurses, and dentists by making them generally inadmissible as evidence in court cases about patient care. Exceptions include cases where a committee is involved in license revocation or when state licensing boards conduct investigations, as they can still subpoena relevant information. The bill also grants immunity from civil lawsuits to committee members and hospital officials for good-faith peer review activities. This change aims to encourage open peer reviews without legal exposure in most circumstances.

SB 1775 creates new rules to prevent and address workplace violence against healthcare workers in hospitals and clinics. It directly affects healthcare facilities, staff, and individuals who commit violent acts in these settings. The bill modifies how assault charges apply when violence occurs in healthcare environments, potentially elevating penalties for such offenses. This is a substantive policy change focused on worker safety and legal accountability, not a procedural or commemorative measure.

SB 1692 replaces multiple Missouri statutes related to abortion with new definitions and reporting requirements. It defines key terms like "abortion" (including termination for reasons other than live birth), "unborn child" (from conception), and "abortion facility" (clinics or offices performing abortions outside hospitals). The bill adds abortion facilities to mandatory reporting requirements for healthcare-associated infections and financial data under Missouri's hospital reporting laws. These changes create a new administrative framework for tracking abortion services and facility compliance, without altering current abortion access rules.