SB 275 enacts R.S. 22:1037.1 to require that for any healthcare service personally performed by a certified registered nurse anesthetist (CRNA) within the CRNA's lawful scope of practice, the insurer’s allowed amount must be no less than the allowed amount the insurer would reimburse a physician for the same service. The bill also forbids insurers from denying network participation to a CRNA solely because of provider type or licensure.
The measure applies to new policies issued on or after January 1, 2027, and requires existing policies to conform at renewal — no later than January 1, 2028. For payers, health systems, and anesthesia providers, SB 275 creates immediate contracting and claims-value implications and raises questions about interactions with federal ERISA preemption and team-based anesthesia billing arrangements.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires parity in the insurer 'allowed amount' paid to CRNAs and physicians for the same service performed personally by the CRNA, and prohibits excluding CRNAs from networks solely on provider type or licensure. The parity applies regardless of billing modifiers or coding designations used to identify the provider.
Who It Affects
Commercial insurers and state-regulated health plans in Louisiana, CRNAs and their employers (hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers), physician anesthesiologists who contract with payers, and patients relying on CRNA-provided anesthesia in outpatient and rural settings. Self-funded ERISA plans may be outside state reach.
Why It Matters
This law locks in payment parity for an advanced-practice clinician group that often bills below physician rates, potentially raising CRNA reimbursement, changing contracting leverage, and prompting payers to revise network and credentialing policies. It also establishes a state-level precedent for parity that other advanced-practice roles could look to.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB 275 adds a single new statute to Louisiana’s insurance code that targets how insurers set the allowed amount for services performed by certified registered nurse anesthetists. In plain terms, when a CRNA personally performs a service that falls within the CRNA’s legal scope, the insurer must treat the allowed amount for that service the same as it would if a physician performed it.
The bill insists this parity hold true regardless of the billing modifier or code the provider uses, reducing the scope for payers to pay CRNAs less by using different claim edits or provider designations.
The bill separately forbids an insurer from denying participation or network inclusion to a CRNA solely because the provider is a CRNA rather than a physician. That language targets categorical exclusions based purely on provider type, though it does not prevent insurers from applying usual credentialing, privileging, or quality standards.SB 275 also sets when the rule takes effect: it applies to policies issued on or after January 1, 2027, and requires existing policies to convert at their next renewal or by January 1, 2028 at the latest.
The statute does not include an enforcement section with specific penalties, nor does it define “allowed amount” beyond tying it to the amount the insurer would pay a physician, leaving operational and legal details — for example, how to treat team-based anesthesia billing, facility vs professional fees, and self-funded ERISA plans — to implementing contracts, regulators, or potential litigation.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill enacts R.S. 22:1037.1 and ties CRNA reimbursement to the insurer’s allowed amount for the same service when personally performed by a physician.
SB 275 requires parity regardless of billing modifier or coding designation — payers cannot rely on different provider codes to pay CRNAs less.
Insurers cannot deny network participation to a CRNA solely because of provider type or licensure; credentialing standards may still apply.
The statute applies to new policies issued on or after January 1, 2027, and forces existing policies to conform on renewal but no later than January 1, 2028.
The bill contains no explicit enforcement mechanism or civil penalty provision; disputes over interpretation likely fall to contract enforcement, the state insurance regulator, or the courts.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Payment parity for CRNA-performed services
This paragraph creates the core substantive rule: when a CRNA personally performs a service within the CRNA’s lawful scope, the insurer’s allowed amount must be at least the same amount the insurer would pay a physician for that identical service. Practically, this forces insurers to align the valuation of professional anesthesia services across provider types. The provision’s linkage to the insurer’s own physician reimbursement (rather than a state fee schedule) leaves payers discretion in setting the baseline but removes the option to pay CRNAs a lower allowed amount solely because they are non-physicians.
Prohibition on network exclusion based solely on provider type
This clause prevents insurers from using categorical provider-type exclusions to keep CRNAs out of networks. It does not prevent insurers from applying normal credentialing or quality-of-care requirements; rather, it bars exclusion decisions made solely because a provider is a CRNA. For contracting teams, this will require review of current exclusion policies and may necessitate changes to network provider directories and acceptance criteria.
Phase-in and conversion requirement for existing plans
Section 2 prescribes that the statute governs new policies issued on or after January 1, 2027, while existing policies must convert to comply at renewal, but no later than January 1, 2028. That staggered approach gives insurers limited runway to renegotiate provider contracts and adjust claims systems, but also creates a hard deadline after which all covered lives in the state will be subject to the parity rule unless exempted (for example by ERISA preemption).
Effective date
The act becomes effective January 1, 2027. Because the substantive rule links allowed amount to what insurers already pay physicians, insurers will need to update claims adjudication logic, provider directories, and contracting templates ahead of that date for new policies and by renewal windows for existing contracts.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs): The statute guarantees parity in allowed amounts for services they personally perform, strengthening billing leverage and likely increasing revenue per professional claim where CRNAs had been paid less.
- Patients in rural and outpatient settings: Providers and facilities that rely on CRNAs for anesthesia services may see improved provider availability and stability if parity reduces reimbursement-driven access gaps.
- Hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers that employ CRNAs: Greater reimbursement parity can improve margins on professional anesthesia services and reduce the need to deploy higher-cost physician anesthesiologists in cases where state law allows CRNAs to practice independently.
Who Bears the Cost
- Commercial insurers and state-regulated health plans: Payers may face higher allowed amounts for CRNA claims, potential increases in network reimbursement costs, and administrative costs to update claims systems and contracts.
- Physician anesthesiologists and some anesthesia groups: The parity rule can compress payment differentials that previously reflected physician training and billing practices, potentially shifting negotiating leverage and fee schedules within anesthesia services.
- Employers sponsoring fully insured plans in Louisiana: If insurers pass through increased allowed amounts through premiums or plan design changes, employers may face higher premiums or adjusted cost-sharing arrangements.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing access and fair pay for an advanced-practice clinician against insurers’ need to value services according to training, outcomes, and cost-effectiveness: SB 275 forces payment equality between CRNAs and physicians for identical services, which can expand access and provider revenue but simultaneously removes a common mechanism payers use to reflect differences in training and role — a trade-off between workforce policy goals and market-based valuation of clinical labor.
SB 275 is narrowly worded but leaves several consequential implementation questions unanswered. It ties parity to the insurer’s own physician reimbursement, which avoids prescribing a specific fee schedule but creates ambiguity: what if an insurer’s physician allowed amount is derived from market-negotiated discounts, reference-based pricing, or provider-specific contracts?
The bill does not define 'allowed amount' or prescribe a methodology for comparing physician and CRNA claims when services are billed differently or bundled.
The statute also does not address team-based anesthesia arrangements where multiple providers participate in a case (for example, a physician supervising multiple CRNAs or split/shared anesthesia bills), nor does it speak to facility versus professional components of payment. Another practical gap is enforcement: SB 275 includes no private right of action language, civil penalties, or explicit administrative enforcement pathway, so disputes may be litigated contractually or brought to the state insurance regulator; self-funded ERISA plans may be outside state authority, creating uneven application across covered lives.
Finally, the parity requirement could prompt payers to narrow coverage in other ways, revise utilization review, or restructure network agreements to control costs — creating second-order market effects that the statute does not anticipate.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.