Walgreens to pay $35 million to settle fraud claims
Compliance Monitor, June 11, 2008
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Walgreens Co. will pay $35 million to settle fraud and abuse claims. Between 2001 and 2005, the company illegally switched prescriptions to more expensive versions in a scam to defraud Medicaid.
According to a Department of Justice (DOJ) release, Walgreens allegedly switched:
- 150 mg or 300 mg tablets of Ranitidine to more expensive capsules
- 10 mg or 20 mg capsules of Fluoxetine to more expensive tablets
- 5 mg tablets of Eldepryl to more expensive capsules
According to the DOJ, changing capsules to tablets, and vice-versa, allowed Walgreens to receive more reimbursement from Medicaid without improving care to the patients.
The $35 million will be divided among federal agencies as well as 48 states and Puerto Rico to pay for separate settlements. Bernard Lisitza, a licensed pharmacist who blew the whistle on the alleged abuse, will receive $5 million for the False Claims Act qui tam action he filed in 2003.
The OIG also announced that Walgreens will enter into a five-year Corporate Integrity Agreement to ensure no future incidents occur. Click here to read the corporate integrity agreement.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Comments
0 comments on “Walgreens to pay $35 million to settle fraud claims ”
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
-
- 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
- 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