Stark Law

Two physicians, Dr. S. and Dr. V., leased a nuclear camera so they would no longer have to refer their patients to the local hospital for nuclear imaging. Faced with the prospect of losing over a third of its $2,274,094 in annual gross nuclear medicine revenues, the hospital responded by threatening to revoke the doctors' admitting privileges. Lengthy negotiations ensued, at the end of which the hospital agreed to sublease the camera from the two physicians; the camera remained at the physicians' offices but other physicians with privileges at the hospital could use it. Four other local physicians who provided the same or similar services to patients as Dr. S. and Dr. V. brought a qui tam action alleging that the sublease violated the Anti-Kickback and Stark Acts and that the defendants falsely certified compliance with those laws in connection with claims submitted to Medicare in violation of the False Claims Act.

Your paper must be two to three pages in length, excluding the title and reference pages; include at least two scholarly sources

Resources - Wood, J. P. (2010). Stark and anti-kickback laws limit lab-marketing methods. MLO: Medical Laboratory Observer, 42(5), 72. Retrieved from the EBSCOhost database.