Emory University.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2020 Jun 1;45(3):419-437. doi: 10.1215/03616878-8161036.
Overtreatment is costly, but is it fraud? In a growing number of False Claims Act cases, the Department of Justice has sought and received multimillion dollar settlements from providers accused of billing Medicare for unnecessary care. This article evaluates the use of the False Claims Act as a tool for reducing overuse.
The author reviewed (1) recent cases where litigants sparred over the applicability of the False Claims Act to overtreatment, and (2) criticisms of the expanding use of the False Claims Act in health care.
Some judges have dismissed suits on the grounds that expert testimony regarding the necessity of treatment is insufficient for concluding Medicare claims were false or fraudulent. Other judges have let cases proceed, especially in instances where clinicians appear to have overstated the severity of patients' illnesses to justify treatment. Cases that lead to changes in medical practice may result in substantial savings to the Medicare program.
Courts have struggled with how to apply the False Claims Act to overtreatment. False Claims Act cases that address unnecessary care are potentially less problematic than other types of cases that address technical violations with few implications for costs or quality.
过度治疗代价高昂,但这是否属于欺诈?在越来越多的虚假索赔法案案件中,美国司法部已向被指控向医疗保险报销不必要护理费用的医疗机构提出并获得了数百万美元的和解。本文评估了将虚假索赔法案用作减少过度治疗手段的效果。
作者回顾了(1)最近在诉讼中,关于是否适用虚假索赔法案来处理过度治疗存在争议的案例,以及(2)对扩大医疗保健中虚假索赔法案使用的批评。
一些法官以缺乏关于治疗必要性的专家证言为由驳回诉讼,认为医疗保险索赔是虚假或欺诈性的结论不足。其他法官则允许案件继续进行,尤其是在临床医生似乎夸大了患者病情严重程度以证明治疗合理的情况下。导致医疗实践发生变化的案件可能会为医疗保险计划节省大量资金。
法院一直在努力寻找如何将虚假索赔法案适用于过度治疗。解决不必要治疗的虚假索赔法案案件比其他类型的案件更具问题,后者仅涉及技术违规行为,对成本或质量几乎没有影响。