Today I want to talk more about business, than about prescription drug abuse.
In selling PastRx, we run into an issue.
Prescribers understand how our system will protect their patients, and lead to better outcomes. They understand how it will protect them from the DEA and from lawsuits.
But they still ask how it will save them money, or make them money.
In fact PastRx will save them money, and perhaps even generate some income for them. And we think that it is pretty inexpensive. But they don’t always seem to agree with this assessment.
So, especially Prescribers out there, here is the question:
“How do we explain value in a way that doesn’t take so long your eyes glaze over?” and the ancillary,” how can we make you feel confident that it is truly in your and your patients best interest to spend some money each month to get these benefits?”
Here are many of the ways PastRx creates value off the top of my head:
- Reduces risk of accidental overdose for patients;
- Increases likelihood of diagnosing and treating those suffering from addiction;
- Increases likelihood of identifying and modifying treatment for those developing tolerance;
- Evidence supports reimbursement for the administration of one of the included risk assessment instruments (again, we think it will be under CPT modifier 99420, but can’t prove it yet);
- Reduces the amount of time spent with a no-issues patient, because at a glance you can see that there are no indications of tolerance or abuse or diversion, so you don’t have to spend any time trying to catch them lying to you;
- Restores trust between Dr. and patient, since you don’t have to start an interaction trying to catch them in a lie about their pain, or their controlled substance use;
- Reduces the amount of time spent with a patient with issues, because you can ask very concrete questions (e.g. “why did you leave Dr. Greene’s practice”) rather than fishing around;
- Reduces time spent by admin staff downloading and printing state PDMP reports;
- Eliminates time spent analyzing tabular PDMP data;
- Reduces risk of lawsuit vs. prescriber;
- Reduces risk of lawsuit vs. institution (practice or hospital etc.);
- Reduces risk of DEA revoking the right to prescribe controlled substances (prescriber and institution);
- Reduces risk of serious legal problems;
- Creates institutional oversight of controlled substance prescribing, protecting the institution from individual prescribers who might act badly (this is especially important for networks of offices, where the CMO isn’t on-site with everyone);
- Might reduce malpractice insurance (we think it will but can’t prove it yet).
I am eager to hear your thoughts on this.