‘Black field’ pharma, telehealth offers elevate battle of curiosity points
In latest months, a new form of partnership between telehealth corporations and pharmaceutical producers has come underneath scrutiny over considerations that such preparations might result in inappropriate prescriptions and poor care. Eli Lilly and Pfizer, together with 5 telehealth corporations accessible by the pharma corporations’ web sites, have not too long ago obtained letters from 4 senators echoing these considerations, asking questions on care, prescription quantity, and the move of information and cash between the companies.
The lawmakers wish to decide whether or not pharma-telehealth offers could also be violating the federal anti-kickback statute. That query has additionally piqued the curiosity of three well being coverage researchers at Brown College. When Ateev Mehrotra and Olivier Wouters — who’ve experience in telehealth and pharmaceutical coverage, respectively — began discussing these novel preparations, they’d a head-scratching second. “Each of us received caught as a result of we’re like, ‘This appears form of fishy,’” Mehrotra advised STAT. “‘I don’t know, what do you suppose?’”
They introduced in colleague Erin Fuse Brown for authorized perspective, and on Friday within the New England Journal of Drugs, the trio highlighted how partnerships between telehealth and pharma might allow entry to essential care — in addition to their potential to induce medically pointless and costly prescriptions. That’s one other rising concern for legislators, as sufferers see extra adverts on social media from telehealth corporations and influencers that aren’t topic to the identical necessities as pharma adverts.
This text is unique to STAT+ subscribers
Unlock this text — plus every day protection and evaluation of the pharma business — by subscribing to STAT+.
Have already got an account? Log in
To learn the remainder of this story subscribe to STAT+.
