• Family of patient who died after orthopedic surgery wins $35M verdict against hospital
  • Orthopedic surgeon wins $20M verdict against Johnson & Johnson
  • Minnesota orthopedic group hit with $111M negligence verdict
  • Orthopedic patient's death highlights potential dangers of prior authorization
  • Spine surgeon's video hits 1 million views on TikTok
  • Spine surgeon killed in Oklahoma hospital shooting
  • Spine surgeon owes $17M to paralyzed patient
  • Providence to pay $22.7M to settle unnecessary spine surgery allegations
  • Spine surgeon gets jail time for abusing patient during hospital visit
  • 'They're on really thin ice': Why 1 insurer has drawn spine surgeons' ire
  • Connecticut hospital to appeal $12.5M verdict to family of patient who died after orthopedic surgery
  • Orthopedic surgeon must face suit in patient's death
  • Spine surgeon 1 of 9 physician billionaires on Forbes' 2022 list
  • 23 spine device companies to watch in 2022
  • 4 spine technologies that promised more than they delivered
  • Orthopedic surgeon salary vs. average household income in each state
  • Orthopedic surgeon's health system exit steeped in controversy
  • Terminated orthopedic surgeon contracts with another New York hospital
  • Orthopedic surgeon convicted of battery at hospital
  • Billionaire spine surgeon buys $23.9M mansion
  • UArizona neurosurgery chair dies after motorcycle collision
  • Texas spine surgeon sued by State Farm over 'unnecessary' procedures
  • The spine tech surgeons say will explode in the next 5 years
  • Could Medtronic's spine business be the next medtech spinoff?
  • Ex-NFL player gets 5 years in prison for $2.9M healthcare fraud scheme
  • 41 'rising stars' in orthopedics
  • Orthopedic surgeon indicted in $10M telemedicine fraud scheme
  • Neurosurgeon's startup hits $1.2B valuation
  • Orthopedic surgeon fined for operating on wrong knee
  • Lawsuits build against Aetna's spine surgery coverage
  • Good news, bad news for orthopedic surgeons: 6 observations
  • Former spine surgeon owes $13M to 2 women over unnecessary procedures
  • Walmart's latest partnership pushes retailer into spine care
  • Texas spine surgeon's $11M verdict being appealed
  • 10 power players in orthopedics
  • Rothman Orthopaedics to become national brand, but no 'aspirations to go beyond US'
  • Sports medicine physician fired amid misconduct allegations involving patients
  • Orthopedic surgeon allegedly exaggerated patient visits to defraud insurers
  • Top orthopedic hospital in every state: US News
  • Orthopedic surgeon asking for misconduct charges to be dropped
  • How Medtronic is strengthening its spine business
  • $85M settlement reached in spinal cord stimulation lawsuits
  • Medtronic's next-gen predictive spine surgery model cleared
  • ZimVie's pediatric scoliosis device gets coverage by Anthem BCBS
  • Spinal fusion alternative device reaches FDA milestone
  • Medtronic pays $2.8M in false claims settlement — 5 things to know

    Medtronic pays $2.8M in false claims settlement — 5 things to know

    Laura Dyrda -  

    The newly-dubbed Medtronic PLC agreed to pay $2.8 million to the United States Justice Department to settle the false claims case alleging illegal payments to physicians, according to a Star Tribune report.

    Here are five things to know about the settlement:

     

    1. The justice department alleged Medtronic, among others, made "illegal payments" to physicians in exchange for recommending procedures that weren't safe or effective, according to the report.

     

    2. Medtronic denied any wrongdoing in a statement issued late last week. The charges have been dismissed after Medtronic agreed to pay $2.8 million with "no admission of liability."

     

    "Medtronic is committed to following appropriate marketing and reimbursement practices at all times, and for many years has had in place a comprehensive and robust employee compliance program," said Medtronic in the statement.

     

    3. The Justice department alleges Medtronic made payments to several physicians in 20 states to "encourage health providers to use [a neurostimulation] device off-label." As a result the company created a rapidly-expanding market for their devices, according to the federal lawsuit.

     

    4. The suit was brought by a former Medtronic sales representative who was concerned about the neuromodulation devices being used for an investigational procedure. The lawsuit alleges hospitals were encouraged to charge Medicare for the unapproved procedure using the billing code for the FDA-approved procedure after selling the device at a "steep discount."

     

    5. There are also allegations the company paid a physician to show other physicians how he performed the off-label procedure.

     

    Copyright © 2022 Becker's Healthcare. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Cookie Policy. Linking and Reprinting Policy.

    Featured Learning Opportunities

    Featured Webinars

    Featured Podcast

    Featured Whitepapers