LSCU SPECIAL FEATURE: Into the Nexus - Anti-Kickback Statute ( " AKS " ) versus Value-Driven Health Care

Part 2: The Tension Increases - Online Auctions Violate the AKS We have noted in previous articles that there is an increasing tension between efforts to reduce healthcare costs and assuring those efforts are not improper inducements under the Anti-Kickback Statute’s (“AKS”). In a recent opinion by the Federal District Court in Connecticut, that tension ratcheted up several notches with the Court’s novel application of the AKS to certain e-commerce arrangements. The decision in Medpricer.com, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co was originally decided in March 2017 and reaffirmed in April. Judge Michael Shea’s decision resolved a contract dispute between MedPricer, a company that provides an online portal for the auctioning of medical supplies and equipment, and Becton, Dickinson & Company (“BD”), a medical products provider. To Read the Full Story, Subscribe, Download a Sample Issue, or Sign In       Related StoriesLSCU SPECIAL FEATURE: Into the Nexus - Anti-Kickback Statute ("AKS") versus Value-Driven Health CareThe California Hurdle - SB 790 and PharmaEffectiveness, The Holy Grail of Compliance - Both the DOJ & OIG Weigh In 
Source: Policy and Medicine - Category: American Health Authors: Source Type: blogs