This post was co-authored by Blair Robinson, a member Robinson+Cole’s Artificial Intelligence Team.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a major player in the realm of health care, promising to completely transform­ its delivery. With AI’s remarkable ability to analyze data, learn, solve problems, and make decisions, it has the potential to enhance patient

On November 1, 2023, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published a proposed rule titled “21st Century Cures Act: Establishment of Disincentives for Health Care Providers That Have Committed Information Blocking” (the Proposed Rule). The Proposed Rule, if finalized, would create disincentives for health care providers that the HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) determines have committed “information blocking” (as defined at 45 C.F.R. § 171.103).Continue Reading HHS Proposes Disincentives for Providers that Commit Information Blocking

On April 14, 2023, the Attorneys General of 18 different states sent a letter to Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure in support of a proposed rule that would require the disclosure of certain ownership information regarding Medicare skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and Medicaid nursing facilities (collectively “Nursing Facilities”), particularly from private equity investors and real estate investment trusts (the “Proposed Rule”).Continue Reading Eighteen States’ Attorneys General Send Letter to CMS in Support of Proposed Rule Requiring Disclosure of Certain Nursing Home and SNF Ownership Information 

On April 12, 2023, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Proposed Rule) that seeks to enhance safeguards of reproductive health care information through changes to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule. The proposal is intended to align with President Biden’s Executive Order

We follow up on our previous blog post concerning the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in favor of 340B hospitals. The Supreme Court previously held that “absent a survey of hospitals’ acquisition costs, HHS may not vary the reimbursement rates for 340B hospitals” and therefore, that HHS exceeded its statutory authority by varying the 2018 and 2019 rates for 340B hospitals without first conducting such survey.Continue Reading 340B Update: District Court Rejects 2022 Payment Methodology for 340B Hospitals Following Supreme Court Win

Below is an excerpt of a contributed article co-authored with Robinson+Cole Business Litigation Group lawyer Ben Daniels published in Physicians Practice on September 16, 2022.

On July 25, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected an appeal brought by Pfizer, Inc. in a case that examines whether a “corrupt” intent is

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) recently issued new guidance (Guidance) on the use of remote communication technologies to deliver audio-only telehealth in accordance with HIPAA. Per OCR, the Guidance is intended to ensure continued access for patients to audio-only telehealth in a secure and compliant manner, particularly once OCR’s notification of enforcement discretion (previously discussed here) tied to the COVID-19 pandemic is rescinded (i.e., once the HHS-declared COVID-19 public health emergency is ended).Continue Reading HHS Issues HIPAA Guidance to Support Audio-Only Telehealth Services

On June 15, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of “340B” hospitals in a notable statutory interpretation case concerning how the federal Medicare program reimburses hospitals for prescription drugs. The case, which was brought by the American Hospital Association, arises from reimbursement reductions imposed by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in 2018 and 2019 on hospitals participating in the 340B program (which the Court noted are hospitals that “generally serve low-income or rural communities”). In those years, HHS sought to impose reductions in reimbursement due to favorable pricing available to 340B hospitals under that program. The hospitals challenged those reductions based on the process HHS followed when setting the reimbursement rates, claiming that HHS’s failure to conduct a survey of hospitals’ average acquisition costs for the drugs prevented HHS from varying reimbursement rates for this distinct group. Therefore, according to the hospitals, HHS was required to pay them based on the average sales price charged by manufacturers for the drugs.Continue Reading Supreme Court Decides in Favor of 340B Hospitals Regarding Medicare Reimbursement Methodology

The federal Office of Inspector General (OIG) recently published a report (OIG Report) as part of a series of analyses of the expansion and utilization of telehealth in response to the COVID-19 public health emergency.  In its report, the OIG concludes that telehealth was “critical for providing services to Medicare beneficiaries during the first year of the pandemic” and that the utilization of telehealth “demonstrates the long-term potential of telehealth to increase access to health care for beneficiaries.” The OIG’s conclusions are notable because they come at a time when policymakers and health care stakeholders are determining whether and how to make permanent certain expansions of telehealth for patients nationwide.
Continue Reading OIG: Telehealth “Critical” to Maintaining Access to Care Amidst COVID-19

In a per curiam decision issued January 13, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the federal health care worker vaccine mandate rule, finding that the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services was authorized by law to issue the rule.  See our previous analyses of the rule and subsequent litigation here and here for more background information on the stakes of this case.
Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Worker Vaccine Mandate