Referral Payments, 'Free' Exam Advertising, and Marketing Photos
An optometrist opens a practice beside an optical boutique. The boutique owner refers patients for eye exams; the optometrist agrees to pay the boutique $40 for every patient who buys eyewear after an exam. The optometrist advertises 'Free comprehensive eye exam' in a newspaper and on social media, but the office charges a $35 retinal imaging technology fee and a $50 contact lens fitting fee that are not mentioned in the ad. The intake form includes a clause authorizing the practice to use the patient's name, photo, and clinical story 'for any purpose.' The practice posts a before-and-after photo of a patient who signed the form, along with a testimonial.
1. Does the $40 per-patient payment violate fee-splitting or kickback rules?
Read the worked answer
Yes. Paying the boutique for each patient who buys eyewear is remuneration for referral and creates a financial incentive to refer. Even if it is labeled marketing support, a per-patient payment tied to eyewear sales is fee splitting. The optometrist should stop the arrangement, recover or reverse any improper payments under advice of counsel, and document the correction. A legitimate lease or bona fide employment arrangement must be structured at fair market value and not tied to referrals.
2. Is the 'free comprehensive eye exam' advertisement deceptive?
Read the worked answer
Yes, if the mandatory fees are not disclosed. 'Free' must mean no charge for the advertised service. If the $35 imaging fee and $50 fitting fee are required for the exam or fitting, the ad is misleading. The practice should state the qualifying conditions and the actual charges clearly. Board advertising rules prohibit false or deceptive statements, and a later disclosure at check-in does not cure the headline claim.
3. What privacy issues arise from the testimonial and before-and-after photo?
Read the worked answer
The photo, name, and clinical story are marketing uses of protected health information. A blanket intake clause authorizing use 'for any purpose' is generally insufficient. The practice needs a specific, plain-language authorization that describes the uses, identifies who may disclose and receive the information, states an expiration date, and explains the right to revoke. Treatment cannot be conditioned on signing it. The practice should remove the post until a valid authorization is obtained and document the authorization.