Usually, we doctors give you advice. In this case, I’d like readers to offer an opinion on an issue that patients and I face regularly.
First, let’s acknowledge the huge reservoir of frustration
and anger directed against insurance companies concerning their coverage
decisions. I have willingly entered this
arena to wage battles for patients. Despite
my vigorous prosecutions of these contests, the outcomes have been
variable. Indeed, these competitions are
not for the causal physician combatant.
The doctor must have the mettle, determination, skill and endurance of a
Navy SEAL if there is to be any prospect of success.
Some of my prior duels against Big Pharma and Big Insurance
are chronicled in the Pharmaceutical Quality category on this blog.
Considering many insurance company coverage actions and decisions,
it is understandable that patients do not believe that these companies
prioritize the health of their members.
Although it is understandable to demonize this industry,
insurance companies are businesses, not charitable organizations. While they deserve opprobrium for many of
their practices, they are not always in the wrong. We cannot expect them to pay for every
medical treatment that we doctors recommend or that patients desire.
For example, should insurance companies be required to cover
medicines that are prescribed off-label?
Every prescription drug has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) only for certain specific conditions. For example, gastroenterologists see many
patients with nausea. We commonly
prescribe Zofran (ondansetron), an effective anti-nausea medicine. The FDA has approved this medicine for nausea
resulting from chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation treatment. Most of the patients for whom I prescribe
ondansetron fall outside of this FDA list of indications. I am prescribing the medicine off-label,
albeit for the same symptom of nausea.
In this instance, insurance companies have generally covered the drug.
There are other instances where the off-label use is for an
entirely different purpose. For
instance, gastroenterologists commonly prescribe a drug that is FDA-approved
to lower cholesterol to patients with certain types of diarrhea. Often, insurance companies will not cover
this off-label use for a medical complaint entirely distinct from the drug’s
approved role, even though this off-label use is considered to be routine use.
These can be difficult issues that may have medical-ethical dimensions. We have all heard of agonizing situations when an insurance
company declines to pay for an experimental medicine for a patient who is
desperate to receive it. And to make it
more complex, there may be a dispute within the medical community if the
treatment is experimental or is actually an established therapy.
Should a drug that is effective for a medical condition but
is not FDA-approved for it be covered by insurance companies? If so, would we all be willing to pay much
higher premiums to accommodate this greatly expanded list of off-label
treatments?
What do readers think about all of this? Should any drug prescribed by your doctor be
covered? If not, when are insurance
companies justified to refuse?
Plain and simple....doctors know more than insurance companies! We pay insurance companies so we can see doctors that know more than insurance companies! If "off label" meds may work for the issue, then the insurance company should pay for them!!
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely!
DeleteAs a family doctor, I have been frustrated by the lack of coverage for meds that are off label but fairly standard practice. Most of the time these are covered. The use of Colestid for post cholecystectomy diarrhea that you allude to is a good example. On occasion an insurance company may actually have a good idea. Once a patient came to me on daily stadol injections and I reluctantly continued them for a time. The insurance company decided they would not pay for it anymore and to my surprise and delight the patient managed her pain with Tylenol from then on. More often though we are frustrated by lack of coverage or inadequate coverage of key meds like inhalers or immune modulators.
ReplyDelete