Prohibits the use of patient quotas for selecting dental treatments by manufacturers upon dentists.
Ayes (17): Kruger, Krueger, Stachowski, Oppenheimer, Montgomery, Duane, Parker, Stavisky, Dilan, Stewart-Cousins, Thompson, Breslin, Espada, Klein, Perkins, Valesky, Peralta
Ayes W/R (15): DeFrancisco, Johnson O, Volker, Padavan, LaValle, Seward, Saland, Farley, Hannon, Larkin, Nozzolio, Leibell, Maziarz, Marcellino, Robach
Nays (1): Diaz
BILL NUMBER: S7614
TITLE OF BILL : An act to amend the public health law, in relation to prohibiting the use of patient quotas for selecting dental treatments
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL : Prohibits conditioning the use of any dental drug, device or service based on a quota of patients the dentist treats with the item.
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS : Adds a new subdivision 27 to section 206 of the public health law, that would prohibit manufacturers and other entitles from requiring dentists to use their drugs, devices, or services on a specific quota of patients in order to obtain the drug, device, or service, and would also prohibit dentists from requesting or accepting items that carried such patient quotas as a condition of use. Bill Section 2 would provide that the law take effect immediately.
JUSTIFICATION : Dentists should have unfettered access to all necessary treatment modalities to serve their patients and should be able to choose those modalities based on the clinical needs of the patient in the professional judgment of the dentist, not based on the need to meet numerical quotas. Certain manufacturers of drugs, dental devices, and other dental treatment services are beginning to use marketing practices where they will not provide a drug, device, or treatment service to a dentist unless the dentist commits to using the product on a specific quota of patients. This practice interferes with the professional judgment of the dentist and is harmful to patients. Unless a dentist is willing to commence unnecessary treatments just to meet a quota, the dentist may lose access to the treatment modality for patients who would best benefit from it. Alternatively, the dentist may be forced to use treatments that are not the best treatment option for certain patients, because of being unable to access the best option due to failure to meet a quota. Such quota requirements are the antithesis of professionalism and are a blatant attempt to boost marketing of products at the expense of the patients those products are intended to serve.
In addition, the quota requirements are anticompetitive and often tend to raise the cost of services to patients, because they reduce the number of dentists who can provide the treatment to the patient. For example, one company requires that a dentist must use its orthodontic treatment modality on at least ten patients per year in order to obtain access to the treatment. Most general dentists would not use this treatment modality on that many patients in a given year, so the net effect of the quota is either to drive patients to more expensive specialists who might use the treatment modality more often or else to have general dentists needlessly use the treatment more often just to fill the quota. Neither the public nor the dental profession is served by such a quota requirement. Some manufacturers have tried to disguise such quotas as "product proficiency" or "quality control" mechanisms, but this overlooks the fact that dentists are licensed by the State of New York for the purpose of being competent to handle all dental modalities, or else not use them at all. These so-called quality justifications have no data or studies to back them up and are not real. The quota system is just another example of a marketing tactic that rewards manufacturers for promoting inefficient and potentially inappropriate care. These kinds of marketing abuses need to be stopped and the proposed law will accomplish that goal with respect to patient quotas, one of the worst of such abuses.
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY : None. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS : None.
EFFECTIVE DATE : Immediately upon the date on which it shall become law.
STATE OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________________________________ 7614 IN SENATE April 26, 2010 ___________Introduced by Sen. KRUGER -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Health AN ACT to amend the public health law, in relation to prohibiting the use of patient quotas for selecting dental treatments THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 206 of the public health law is amended by adding a new subdivision 27 to read as follows: 27. THE COMMISSIONER SHALL PROMULGATE REGULATIONS TO REQUIRE THAT A MANUFACTURER OR OTHER ENTITY SELLING, LEASING, OR OTHERWISE PROVIDING ANY DRUG, DEVICE, OR HEALTH CARE SERVICE SHALL NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDI- RECTLY, ESTABLISH AS A CONDITION FOR THE USE BY A DENTIST OF SUCH DRUG, DEVICE, OR HEALTH CARE SERVICE THAT THE DENTIST MEET ANY QUOTA FOR THE NUMBER OF PATIENTS ON WHOM THE DENTIST USES THE DRUG, DEVICE, OR HEALTH CARE SERVICE AND THAT A DENTIST SHALL NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, REQUEST OR RECEIVE FROM ANY MANUFACTURER OR OTHER ENTITY A DRUG, DEVICE, OR HEALTH CARE SERVICE HAVING A CONDITION THAT THE DENTIST MEET ANY QUOTA FOR THE NUMBER OF PATIENTS ON WHOM THE DENTIST USES THE DRUG, DEVICE, OR HEALTH CARE SERVICE. S 2. This act shall take effect immediately.EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets [ ] is old law to be omitted. LBD17047-01-0