Abstract

Payments from pharmaceutical and device manufacturers to physicians may influence the advice physicians give patients and peers. To investigate the nature and amounts of monetary and other benefits that gastroenterologists received and to determine the participation of those receiving benefits in the formulation of clinical practice guidelines. This cohort study analyzed information from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database, including all reports about payments that pharmaceutical and device manufacturers gave to adult or pediatric gastroenterologists in 2016. PubMed was used to examine the professional affiliations and publication records of top payment recipients. Panelists of clinical guidelines who also received personal financial rewards listed in the Open Payments database were identified. Payments made to gastroenterologists by pharmaceutical company and device manufacturers. Of 15 497 gastroenterologists, 13 467 (86.9%) received a total of 432 463 payments accounting for a total expenditure of $67 144 862. Direct financial payments for consultations, talks, or other services were made to 2055 physicians and were responsible for 4.2% of payments (18 179 of 432 463), but for 62.7% of total expenditures ($42 086 207 of $67 144 862). Although a significant number of submissions were for food and beverages, they constituted only a small amount of total expenditure. For gastroenterologists treating adult patients, 10 products were linked to 63.8% of payments (11 221 of 17 588) related to direct financial rewards and 37.1% of the total expenditures ($24 892 643 of $67 144 862). Twenty-nine of 36 clinical practice guidelines included panelists who had received honoraria or consultation fees from industry sources, with amounts exceeding $10 000 in 8 of them (22%). Most gastroenterologists accept meals or gifts from industry, with 2055 of 15 497 gastroenterologists receiving direct payments and 8 of 36 clinical practice guidelines panelists having received more than $10 000. Considering the known impact of such benefits on prescribing patterns and other professional behaviors, policy makers should consider revising regulations governing interactions with industry and disclosure formats alerting others to their potential biasing impact.

Highlights

  • Collaboration between health care professionals and the pharmaceutical industry often drives medical progress and, benefits patients

  • While journal editors responded to these findings by mandating disclosures of potential conflict of interest (COI),[4,5,6] the possible extent of industry sponsorship came to light in the course of investigations by the Department of Justice, which led to a settlement between the United States and 5 companies owing to concerns about violations of federal anti-kickback regulations, as physicians had received consulting fees for using joint implants produced by these companies.[7]

  • Using physician workforce data published by professional societies, 88.9% of board-certified adult GIs (12 558 of 14 126) and 66.7% of board-certified pediatric GIs (914 of 1371) (P < .001) received some form of benefit from industry in 2016

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Collaboration between health care professionals and the pharmaceutical industry often drives medical progress and, benefits patients This Open Payments database of CMS facilitates the identification and tracking of COIs.[9,10] it is unclear whether it changed behaviors, as rewards remain common and often involve physicians who play a role in formulating treatment guidelines that affect products of companies that supported them.[11,12]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.