something like 20% of US health spend is on outpatient care. i dont know how much of that relates to medication management, but id imagine a lot does. PCPs get paid more when they manage a patients medication, and many psychiatrists make nearly all their income from adjusting prescriptions. im sure other specialties are similar. so this theoretically enables some of that work to be done without the physician. this could significantly reduce cost of outpt services, although it will depend very much on how hard it is for pharma companies to demonstrate non rx use of their products is safe and effective. it may be the case that only a few meds actually are eligible, or that many are, once the guidance is finalized
i havent read the guidance doc yet so dont really know how this would play out in terms of who decides what to rx if not a doc.
i personally am sort of disappointed to see doctors becoming even more sidelined. doctors really do an important job of filtering info for patients, advocating / negotiating with insurance companies, and looking out for them. this could potentially be one less protection for patients as large companies get more power to control info. id like to see cost taken out of the system by reducing pricing power by breaking up large providers rather than disintermediating doctors, but that isnt within fda's mandate, so i understand why fda would go for something like this
this could be good for patients if it is implemented in a way that doesnt give pharma too much power over patients. cost would decrease and access to meds could increase. however there may be more patients taking medicines for reasons other than the health benefits (ie marketing power / influence)