O'Donnell Thomas P, Fendler Mark K
University of Missouri-Columbia, USA.
J Health Law. 2007 Spring;40(2):205-40.
Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), which generally administer prescription drug benefits as one component of an employer's or other sponsor's health insurance plan, have come under fire in recent years for turning profits at a time when consumer advocates and employers are struggling to contain the costs of health insurance and prescription drugs. Lawsuits alleging that PBMs are breaching certain fiduciary duties to the health plans they serve, however, have failed for the most part on grounds that PBMs are not "fiduciaries" under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Moreover, states' attempts to regulate PBMs through legislation imposing fiduciary obligations and other related requirements have also generally failed for many different reasons. This Article examines the PBM industry, recent legal developments concerning PBMs' status as ERISA "fiduciaries", the arguments being made for and against stricter regulation of PBMs' business practices, and why litigation and legislation attempting to impose fiduciary obligations upon PBMs have generally failed. The authors conclude that it is market forces and competition, rather than litigation or legislation, that will effectively motivate PBMs to play a role in the cost containment of prescription drugs in the years ahead.
药品福利管理机构(PBMs)通常作为雇主或其他赞助商医疗保险计划的一个组成部分来管理处方药福利,近年来,在消费者权益倡导者和雇主努力控制医疗保险和处方药成本之际,PBMs却因盈利问题而受到抨击。然而,指控PBMs对其所服务的健康计划违反某些信托责任的诉讼,在很大程度上因PBMs根据《雇员退休收入保障法》(ERISA)不属于“受托人”而失败。此外,各州试图通过立法对PBMs施加信托义务和其他相关要求来进行监管的努力,也因许多不同原因而普遍失败。本文探讨了PBM行业、近期关于PBMs作为ERISA“受托人”地位的法律发展、支持和反对更严格监管PBMs商业行为的论点,以及为何试图对PBMs施加信托义务的诉讼和立法普遍失败。作者得出结论,未来几年,将有效促使PBMs在控制处方药成本方面发挥作用的是市场力量和竞争,而非诉讼或立法。