CVS Caremark to pay $36.7M to settle fraud allegations
Healthcare Auditing Weekly, March 25, 2008
CVS Caremark will pay $36.7 million to settle claims it increased Medicare reimbursement by improperly switching patients to the more-expensive form of Ranitidine, according to a Department of Justice (DOJ) press release.
Between 2000 and 2006, CVS Caremark allegedly dispensed Ranitidine capsules instead of tablets. The change netted CVS Caremark as much as $62 on a single prescription. Medicaid sets maximum reimbursement prices for the tablet form of the drug but not for capsules, which are more expensive but prescribed less frequently by physicians.
The practice came to light when a licensed pharmacist filed a whistleblower lawsuit in 2003. Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia will receive money as part of the settlement.
CVS Caremark also entered into a five-year corporate integrity agreement with the OIG.
Comments
0 comments on “CVS Caremark to pay $36.7M to settle fraud allegations ”
Related Products
-
Strategies for Health Care Compliance
News and real-life examples to increase the effectiveness of your compliance program. Strategies for Health Care Compliance...
-
Compliance Monitor
This HTML e-mail newsletter delivers news on Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse, as well as recent documents and targets...
-
Medicare Weekly Update
Each issue of Medicare Weekly Update includes the latest CMS proposed and final rules, CMS manual revisions, and...
-
Medicare Update for Physician Services
Medicare Update for Physician Services is a free, monthly e-zine that delivers news and information to help physician...
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Q&A: Acute respiratory failure diagnosis does not require intubation
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- Oxygen Cylinder Storage Requirements
- Q&A: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- Understand the spine to code back procedures correctly
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Searched