Trilegal律师事务所的企业、制药、医疗及生命科学领域合伙人阿什温·萨普拉指出，针对当前医院定价问题的讨论，有必要采取相应措施。不过他强调，任何监管举措都应保持平衡，需充分考量提供医疗服务所需的成本，而不能简单地实施一刀切的价格上限。
Ashwin Sapra, Partner – Corporate, Pharmaceuticals, Healthcare & Life Sciences, at Trilegal, said some action is needed on the ongoing hospital pricing debate. However, he stressed that any regulatory move should be balanced and take into account the costs involved in providing healthcare, rather than simply imposing a blanket price cap.
近期医院定价问题再度引发热议，这可能会使医疗板块持续受到市场关注。目前投资者最关心的问题是：新的监管框架将以何种形式出台？又会对医院的利润率产生多大影响？
The renewed debate over hospital pricing could keep healthcare stocks in focus, with the key question for investors now shifting to what form a new regulatory framework may take and how far it could affect hospital margins. The issue is before the Supreme Court following concerns over the difference between the procurement price of certain medicines and the final price charged to patients.
由于部分药品的采购价与患者实际支付价格之间存在较大差距，该问题目前已被提交至最高法院审理。尽管患者负担能力已成为核心关切点，但法律专家普遍认为，最终出台的政策必须在患者负担水平、医疗服务的可及性、行业投资需求以及医院扩建医疗设施的必要性之间寻求平衡。
While affordability has emerged as the central concern, legal experts believe any eventual policy will have to balance patient costs with accessibility, investment and the need for hospitals to expand healthcare facilities.
随着定价问题重新成为焦点，医疗类股票已从高位回调15%至20%。因此，未来的监管走向很可能成为影响该行业走势的关键因素。萨普拉表示，最高法院可以着重强调这一问题并敦促政府着手制定相关法规，但最终的决策权仍掌握在政府手中。
Hospital stocks have already corrected 15-20% from their highs as the pricing debate has returned to the spotlight. The regulatory path from here could therefore become an important trigger for the sector. Sapra said the Supreme Court can highlight the issue and ask the government to consider regulation, but policymaking would ultimately rest with the government.
点击此处阅读：最高法院质询为何一款定价为2700卢比的抗癌药，其零售价竟高达27000卢比在萨普拉看来，医疗定价问题涉及中央与地方政府，任何监管调整都需要经过更为复杂的程序。政府在充分调研后，可能会出台新法律或对现行法规进行修订。对医院而言，监管措施的具体内容将具有决定性意义。
Read Here | Supreme Court questions why a ₹2,700 cancer medicine carries a ₹27,000 MRPAccording to Sapra, healthcare pricing involves both the Centre and states and any regulatory changes would require a broader process. The government could consider a new law or amendments to existing regulations after examining the issue. For hospitals, the nature of that regulation will be important.
萨普拉表示，政府在制定相关政策框架之前，最好能与患者、制药公司、医疗器械公司、医院以及其他医疗机构进行充分沟通和协商。她强调，监管措施应当充分考虑医院在药品采购过程中所承担的各种成本（如储存、运输和浪费费用），尤其是那些在普通药店难以买到的特殊药品。在药品定价问题上，人们常提到的“16%的利润上限”这一数字其实并不适用于所有医院采购的药品；该数字源自2013年颁布的《药品价格控制条例》，仅适用于被列为“必需药品”的药品品种。而对于非“必需药品”，现行法规的适用标准有所不同。
Sapra said the government would ideally consult patients, pharmaceutical and medical device companies, hospitals and other healthcare institutions before arriving at a framework. Sapra said, while arguing that regulation should take into account the costs hospitals incur before determining whether mark-ups are justified. These can include storage, transit and wastage costs, particularly for specialised medicines that may not be widely available at regular pharmacies. The 16% margin figure that has emerged in the pricing debate also may not translate into a uniform cap across hospital medicines. Sapra explained that the figure comes from the Drugs Price Control Order , 2013, and applies to scheduled formulations identified as essential drugs. Non-scheduled formulations are treated differently under the existing framework.
印度最高法院的高级法律顾问HP·拉尼纳也认为，下一步应该由政府而非法院来主导政策的制定。他认为，中央政府和各邦政府都应承担相应的责任，因为医疗保健是一个涉及多方利益的主题；他建议成立一个委员会，汇集各方利益相关者的意见后再由政府做出最终决策。此外，广泛的咨询过程有助于避免仅对医疗保健产业链的某一部分进行监管，从而降低政策执行的偏差。萨普拉以心脏支架为例指出：虽然受监管的心脏支架价格有所下降，但患者的总体医疗费用并未因此减少。
Read Here | Hospital stocks sell-off a buying opportunity or a risk? Here is what analysts adviceHP Ranina, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court, also expects the next step to come from the government rather than the court. He said both the Centre and states have a role to play because healthcare is a concurrent subject and called for movement towards a policy that takes the interests of different stakeholders into account.“You have to take a balanced view, but some view has to be taken,” Ranina said. He suggested that a committee could bring stakeholders together and assess their views before the government arrives at a decision.A broader consultation could also reduce the risk of regulating only one part of the healthcare chain. Sapra cited the example of cardiac stents, saying that while regulated stent prices came down, the overall cost to patients did not necessarily fall.
在他看来，如果目标是降低医疗保健的成本，那么制造商、进口商、医院以及中介机构都应当被纳入考虑范围。因此，对于医院类股票而言，近期的不确定性并不在于医疗保健价格是否会受到更严格的监管，而在于最终政策的具体内容。一个全面的的价格控制框架可能会对医院的利润产生影响；而一种以协商为基础、同时考虑整个医疗保健产业链成本的政策，则可能会带来更加平衡的结果。
In his view, manufacturers, importers, hospitals and intermediaries would all need to be considered if the objective is to make healthcare more affordable. For hospital stocks, the near-term uncertainty is therefore less about whether healthcare pricing will face greater scrutiny and more about the shape of the eventual policy. A broad price-control framework could have implications for hospital margins, while a consultation-led approach that considers costs across the healthcare chain may lead to a more balanced outcome.
在情况更加明朗之前，监管政策的变动很可能会继续对该行业构成压力。投资者将会密切关注政府是会选择直接实施价格控制，还是选择制定一个涵盖医疗保健产业链中所有相关方的更广泛的政策框架。关于整个讨论的更多内容，请观看附带的视频。
Until there is greater clarity, regulatory developments are likely to remain an overhang for the sector. Investors will be watching whether the government moves towards direct price controls or opts for a wider framework covering different participants in the healthcare ecosystem. For the entire discussion, watch the accompanying video