Lacktman, Wein Quoted in mHealthIntelligence About OIG’s Approval of Free SmartPhone Giveaway for Medication Adherence Tracking
05 February 2019
Partner Nate Lacktman and Of Counsel Emily Wein were quoted in the mHealthIntelligence article, “OIG Oks Free Phones in mHealth Project Targeting Medication Adherence,” about the Office of the Inspector General decision to approve a digital health care company’s plan to loan free smartphones to patients enrolled in a project tracking medication adherence. The OIG last month ruled in favor of the digital health company’s plans which gives phones to patients enrolled in a digital therapeutic program in which they track medication adherence through an ingestible sensor and corresponding mobile health platform. This is the sixth time that the OIG has approved a projects like this.
Lacktman and Wein said the OIG ruled that the program did not violate anti-kickback laws for numerous reasons and also noted that the OIG’s ruling is specific to the case, but it points to support by the federal government for programs that improve access to care and health outcomes.
“OIG included its traditional disclaimer that the advisory opinion can only be relied upon by the specific company that requested it, and the opinion would be null if any material facts were not disclosed,” they wrote. “Companies offering similar digital health therapeutics or remote patient monitoring programs should closely review the opinion because it offers insight into the government’s view on how technology can promote access to care. Companies evaluating or developing similar programs offering free or discounted technology should carefully consider the safeguards enumerated in OIG’s analysis prior to launch.”
Lacktman and Wein said the OIG ruled that the program did not violate anti-kickback laws for numerous reasons and also noted that the OIG’s ruling is specific to the case, but it points to support by the federal government for programs that improve access to care and health outcomes.
“OIG included its traditional disclaimer that the advisory opinion can only be relied upon by the specific company that requested it, and the opinion would be null if any material facts were not disclosed,” they wrote. “Companies offering similar digital health therapeutics or remote patient monitoring programs should closely review the opinion because it offers insight into the government’s view on how technology can promote access to care. Companies evaluating or developing similar programs offering free or discounted technology should carefully consider the safeguards enumerated in OIG’s analysis prior to launch.”
People
Related News
25 July 2024
In the News
Donald Schroeder on Groff – ‘Supreme Court decision is inviting a more fact-based analysis’
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Donald Schroeder assessed the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in a religious accommodation case as it returns to the district court in the Law360 article, “A Year After High Court Spotlight, Groff Case Still A Bellwether.”
24 July 2024
In the News
Louis Lehot Featured in Q&A on How Startups Can Prepare for IPO
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Louis Lehot features in the Q&A, "How startups can get in top shape for an IPO, according to Silicon Valley lawyer Louis Lehot," part of Business Insider's Road to IPO' series.
24 July 2024
In the News
Courtenay Brinckerhoff on Patent Cap in Drug Pricing – ‘Hard to predict if this will make a difference’
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Courtenay Brinckerhoff discussed a recent bill passed in the U.S. Senate aimed at lowering drug prices by limiting the number of patents that can be asserted in cases over biosimilars in the Law360 article, “Patent Cap In Drug Pricing Bill Seen As Having Muted Effect.”