Only a day after NPR reported that SF-based healthcare company had given One Medical COVID vaccinations to ineligible patients, staff who did not have patients, and friends and family of the company’s leadership, the departments for public health in San Francisco, San Mateo and Alameda. provinces have announced that they are terminating their vaccine partnerships with the company.
According to NPR reporting via internal emails among doctors and staff, One Medical received an award in early January and distributed it to members. One doctor apparently allowed members – who pay an annual fee of $ 199 to receive care – to make vaccination appointments for two weeks without confirming their eligibility (although proof that they could claim in person), and allegedly discouraged an internal email. medical staff to “police” patients’ suitability A button was allegedly added to the appointment portal on January 14 for patients to testify that they are health workers or otherwise eligible, but NPR leaked emails indicating that One Medical doctor has been sounding the alarm over the past few weeks about healthy patients in their twenties or thirties. receipt of vaccines by the company, in spite of state and local protocols for vaccine priority.
Forbes broke the story two weeks earlier, referring to a comment from an anonymous employee who said that ‘the policy is still that we do not turn [patients] away. ‘
The San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH) issued a statement to NPR announcing 12,000 vaccine doses to One Medical, specifically for distribution to workers performing ‘home care services … and health workers’. And it says the department “expects all of its vaccine partner partners to follow vaccination guidelines from the state and SF DPH.”
But now, as NBC Bay Area reports, three Bay Area provinces, including San Francisco, have stopped all vaccine awards to One Medical.
‘The problems with One Medical were [a] disappointment, but is not representative of the province’s robust and successful vaccination effort, ”San Mateo County officials said in a statement to NBC.
As the Chronicle reported Wednesday, SFDPH asked One Medical to return 1,600 doses it had not yet given. ABC Lars ‘Kate Larson obtained a copy of the very heartfelt letter sent by SFDPH, which makes no offense to violations, and concludes:’ We appreciate your continued work in the overall response to this pandemic, and we will contact us when we are ready to assign additional doses to One Medical for administration at a future date. “
This is the letter that San Francisco’s Department of Public Health sent to One Medical on Monday, instructing them to return 1,600 doses of the Pfizer vaccine, after media reports surfaced that One Medical may allow people to skip the vaccine line. pic.twitter.com/N026fBESqP
– Kate Larsen (@ KateABC7) 25 February 2021
One Medical announced on Wednesday that some employees who were allegedly responsible for the improper distribution of vaccine doses have been terminated, as ABC 7 reported. But at the same time, they suggested that media reports about improper distribution were affecting ‘our industry values’. ‘
“Any allegations that we generally and knowingly disregard the qualification guidelines are contrary to our actual approach to vaccine administration,” a One Medical spokesman said. said in a statement, which continues with a list of different methods the company uses to examine patients and to be eligible for vaccine. “Our data currently show that nationwide, 96% of individuals vaccinated by One Medical have appropriate documentation, and 4% are generally vaccinated according to zero wasting protocols.”
One Medical also said that its non-paying members do not represent the majority of people who have vaccinated the company.
“The majority of individuals vaccinated by One Medical in the US are not our own annual members who are payable, but are referrals from health departments, including health workers, nursing homes, educators and the homeless,” the spokesman said. .
Nevertheless, the company terminated ‘several’ employees for not complying with the protocol, according to ABC 7, saying it has a ‘zero tolerance policy’ for such actions.
Issues around equities and distribution protocols are likely to recur many times in the coming months.
“I think from an ethical point of view we need to be very vigilant, not just look at what the regulations say, but what are the factors and the ways in which structural racism is actually built into the way the distribution channels are set up,” he said. David Magnus, director of the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, with ABC 7. And he suggests that it’s everyone’s personal responsibility to wait their turn and not try to cut the line before they are eligible.
Previously: SF-based medical medicine that apparently does not allow patients and staff to work from home to get vaccinations
Photo via a medical