[{"innerBlocks":[],"name":"core\/freeform","postId":998,"blockType":{"name":"core\/freeform","keywords":[],"attributes":{"content":{"type":"string","source":"raw"},"lock":{"type":"object"}},"providesContext":[],"usesContext":[],"selectors":[],"supports":{"className":false,"customClassName":false,"reusable":false},"styles":[],"variations":[],"apiVersion":3,"title":"Classic","description":"Use the classic WordPress editor.","category":"text"},"originalContent":"The Federal Trade Commission has filed a complaint in federal court against Surescripts, alleging that the health IT vendor has engaged in a \u201clong-running anticompetitive scheme\u201d to maintain its monopolies.

Specifically, the FTC contends that the company engaged in \u201cillegal monopolization\u201d of two electronic prescribing markets\u2014routing and eligibility.

\u201cRouting is the transmission of prescription and prescription-related information from a prescriber (via the prescriber\u2019s electronic health record system) to a pharmacy,\u201d states the FTC\u2019s complaint<\/a>. \u201cEligibility is the transmission of a patient\u2019s formulary and benefit information from a payer (usually the patient\u2019s pharmacy benefit manager) to a prescriber\u2019s EHR.\u201d

In its complaint, the FTC alleges that Surescripts purposely intended to prevent e-prescription routing and eligibility customers on both sides of each market from using additional platforms\u2014a practice known as multihoming\u2014using anticompetitive exclusivity agreements, threats and other exclusionary tactics.

\u201cSurescripts has engaged in a long-running campaign of threats and other non-merits based competition to ensure that no other competitor could get a toehold in either market,\u201d according to the FTC complaint. \u201cAs one example, when Allscripts, a large EHR customer of Surescripts, attempted to enter into a non-exclusive agreement with Surescripts in 2014 so Allscripts could use Emdeon, Surescripts launched a series of threats\u2014what senior Surescripts executives called their \u2018nuclear missiles.\u2019 \u201d

As a result of these types of anticompetitive actions, the FTC contends that \u201cdecade-long monopolies\u201d in the e-prescribing routing and eligibility markets have produced higher prices, reduced quality, stifled innovation, suppressed output and stymied alternative business models.

Also See<\/b>: Mobile app vendor agrees to $940K FTC settlement<\/a>

\u201cFor the past decade, Surescripts has used a series of anticompetitive contracts throughout the e-prescribing industry to eliminate competition and keep out competitors,\u201d said Bruce Hoffman, director of the Bureau of Competition at the FTC, in a written statement. \u201cSurescripts\u2019s illegal contracts denied customers and, ultimately, patients, the benefits of competition\u2014including lower prices, increased output, thriving innovation, higher quality and more customer choice. Through this litigation, we hope to eliminate the anticompetitive conduct, open the relevant markets to competition and redress the harm that Surescripts\u2019s conduct has caused.\u201d

Surescripts CEO Tom Skelton issued a written statement, noting that the company is \u201cvery disappointed\u201d at the allegations in the FTC\u2019s complaint.

\u201cFor more than 18 years, we have operated fairly in an innovative and dynamic marketplace to increase patient safety, lower costs and ensure quality healthcare,\u201d said Skelton. \u201cSurescripts pioneered the use of two-sided networks that enable the safe and secure exchange of patient health information. Since 2009, Surescripts has reduced the cost of electronic prescribing by 70 percent. And since 2016, we have driven a 64 percent improvement in the accuracy of the more than 5 million electronic prescriptions we process each day.\u201d

At the same time, Skelton added that Surescripts is \u201cmaking an important change\u201d to its e-prescribing business agreements with pharmacies by removing the loyalty provisions in those contracts.

\u201cThis step addresses one of the FTC\u2019s chief concerns while reflecting the current dynamics of the healthcare industry and the state of electronic prescribing today,\u201d he concluded. \u201cSurescripts has been cooperating with the FTC throughout its investigation, and we remain focused on meeting our customers\u2019 needs. We take seriously our role in helping medical professionals better serve patients, who are the ultimate beneficiaries of our nationwide health information network.\u201d

The day before the FTC action, Surescripts released its 2018 National Progress Report, contending that \u201cinteroperability is occurring at scale and driving measurable improvements in healthcare quality and cost for patients and providers.\u201d Its nationwide health information network processed 17.7 billion secure health data transactions last year\u2014a 29 percent increase over 2017\u2014among 1.61 million healthcare professionals.

The company\u2019s report also says it \u201cadded 8 million unique patients to its master patient index, which now includes 258 million patients, or nearly 80 percent of the total U.S. population and 93 percent of all insured patients.\u201d","saveContent":"The Federal Trade Commission has filed a complaint in federal court against Surescripts, alleging that the health IT vendor has engaged in a \u201clong-running anticompetitive scheme\u201d to maintain its monopolies.

Specifically, the FTC contends that the company engaged in \u201cillegal monopolization\u201d of two electronic prescribing markets\u2014routing and eligibility.

\u201cRouting is the transmission of prescription and prescription-related information from a prescriber (via the prescriber\u2019s electronic health record system) to a pharmacy,\u201d states the FTC\u2019s complaint<\/a>. \u201cEligibility is the transmission of a patient\u2019s formulary and benefit information from a payer (usually the patient\u2019s pharmacy benefit manager) to a prescriber\u2019s EHR.\u201d

In its complaint, the FTC alleges that Surescripts purposely intended to prevent e-prescription routing and eligibility customers on both sides of each market from using additional platforms\u2014a practice known as multihoming\u2014using anticompetitive exclusivity agreements, threats and other exclusionary tactics.

\u201cSurescripts has engaged in a long-running campaign of threats and other non-merits based competition to ensure that no other competitor could get a toehold in either market,\u201d according to the FTC complaint. \u201cAs one example, when Allscripts, a large EHR customer of Surescripts, attempted to enter into a non-exclusive agreement with Surescripts in 2014 so Allscripts could use Emdeon, Surescripts launched a series of threats\u2014what senior Surescripts executives called their \u2018nuclear missiles.\u2019 \u201d

As a result of these types of anticompetitive actions, the FTC contends that \u201cdecade-long monopolies\u201d in the e-prescribing routing and eligibility markets have produced higher prices, reduced quality, stifled innovation, suppressed output and stymied alternative business models.

Also See<\/b>: Mobile app vendor agrees to $940K FTC settlement<\/a>

\u201cFor the past decade, Surescripts has used a series of anticompetitive contracts throughout the e-prescribing industry to eliminate competition and keep out competitors,\u201d said Bruce Hoffman, director of the Bureau of Competition at the FTC, in a written statement. \u201cSurescripts\u2019s illegal contracts denied customers and, ultimately, patients, the benefits of competition\u2014including lower prices, increased output, thriving innovation, higher quality and more customer choice. Through this litigation, we hope to eliminate the anticompetitive conduct, open the relevant markets to competition and redress the harm that Surescripts\u2019s conduct has caused.\u201d

Surescripts CEO Tom Skelton issued a written statement, noting that the company is \u201cvery disappointed\u201d at the allegations in the FTC\u2019s complaint.

\u201cFor more than 18 years, we have operated fairly in an innovative and dynamic marketplace to increase patient safety, lower costs and ensure quality healthcare,\u201d said Skelton. \u201cSurescripts pioneered the use of two-sided networks that enable the safe and secure exchange of patient health information. Since 2009, Surescripts has reduced the cost of electronic prescribing by 70 percent. And since 2016, we have driven a 64 percent improvement in the accuracy of the more than 5 million electronic prescriptions we process each day.\u201d

At the same time, Skelton added that Surescripts is \u201cmaking an important change\u201d to its e-prescribing business agreements with pharmacies by removing the loyalty provisions in those contracts.

\u201cThis step addresses one of the FTC\u2019s chief concerns while reflecting the current dynamics of the healthcare industry and the state of electronic prescribing today,\u201d he concluded. \u201cSurescripts has been cooperating with the FTC throughout its investigation, and we remain focused on meeting our customers\u2019 needs. We take seriously our role in helping medical professionals better serve patients, who are the ultimate beneficiaries of our nationwide health information network.\u201d

The day before the FTC action, Surescripts released its 2018 National Progress Report, contending that \u201cinteroperability is occurring at scale and driving measurable improvements in healthcare quality and cost for patients and providers.\u201d Its nationwide health information network processed 17.7 billion secure health data transactions last year\u2014a 29 percent increase over 2017\u2014among 1.61 million healthcare professionals.

The company\u2019s report also says it \u201cadded 8 million unique patients to its master patient index, which now includes 258 million patients, or nearly 80 percent of the total U.S. population and 93 percent of all insured patients.\u201d","order":0,"get_parent":{},"attributes":[],"attributesType":{"content":{"type":"string","source":"raw"},"lock":{"type":"object"}},"dynamicContent":""}]

FTC sues Surescripts, charging anticompetitive actions in e-prescribing

More for you