If the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has its way, one of the casualties of the COVID-19 pandemic would be the in-person speaker programs many drug and device companies sponsor. The OIG issued a special fraud alert Nov. 16 questioning the need for such events in which health care professionals are often paid a hefty honorarium or fee to provide colleagues with information that’s readily available online and in the labeling of a drug or device.

The latest global regulatory news, changes and updates affecting medical devices and technologies, including: OIG: Medicare overpaid for facet-joint injections; FDA posts IIE policy for non-COVID tests.

The draft rules for the Stark and Anti-Kickback statutes (AKS) seem to have excluded makers of devices, but Meena Datta of Sidley Austin told BioWorld MedTech that while these agencies have plenty of reasons to rethink that notion, the final rules are unlikely to emerge in 2020 simply because of the complexity of the undertaking. While the final rules may reverse the drafts’ exclusion of makers of devices and diagnostics, device makers were upbeat at the prospect that they could engage in value-based payment arrangements with providers.

Despite a substantial build-up of expectations, the U.S. federal government has excluded device makers from a proposal to provide safe harbors under the anti-kickback statutes for value-based arrangements between providers and medical device makers. The news comes as a blow to device makers, who have argued for some time that value-based arrangements between industry and hospitals could save the taxpayer millions each year in Medicare spending, but the draft rule made note of concern that such arrangements might reduce competition among device makers.