Yes--pharmacies should be subject to the same level of transparency to the public, and so should chemical repackagers, who proffer deals that result in pharmacies making larger profits than they would normally if they chose to dispense nationally authorized products. This alerts consumers and payers that there may be strong financial incentives influencing professional's specific therapeutic recommendations--a dose of "healthy skepticism" is warranted (see: http://www.healthyskepticism.org/global/).
But current lack of transparency is only one determinant clouding medical and pharmacy decision-making in the promotion-frenzied compounded drug marketplace that can lead to increased risk or unfair transfer and distribution of risk to patients and subsequently, payers. Where there are outright kick-backs for prescribing, compensation for pseudo-trials, or gradually elevating AWPs for ingredients, fraud and abuse must be identified and vigorously prosecuted.
But current lack of transparency is only one determinant clouding medical and pharmacy decision-making in the promotion-frenzied compounded drug marketplace that can lead to increased risk or unfair transfer and distribution of risk to patients and subsequently, payers. Where there are outright kick-backs for prescribing, compensation for pseudo-trials, or gradually elevating AWPs for ingredients, fraud and abuse must be identified and vigorously prosecuted.
No comments:
Post a Comment