Physician Pharmaceutical Industry Interactions Research Articles

Conflict of interest in physician–pharmaceutical industry interactions: Possible interventions in Nigeria medical practice

Collaboration between physicians and the pharmaceutical, medical device, and biotechnology industries results in the development of products of great benefit to the public. However, when these interactions negatively influence professional judgments at the expense of the goals of medicine, it becomes a cause of great concern. The objective of this simple review was to bring to the fore the conflicts that exist between these two important areas of patient care and to suggest ways to prevent it in Nigeria. A literature search in the PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science databases was done using the terms conflict of interest, physician, pharmaceutical, medical practice, detailing, biomedical research, bioethics, prescribing pattern, singly or in combination to identify relevant articles. The results are arranged based on the themes of related published articles. This review shows that interactions between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry have multiple areas of conflict ranging from reduction in the quality of patient care, loss of objectivity in professional education, scientific integrity, and the public’s trust in medicine. Interaction between pharmaceutical sales representatives (PSRs) and physicians commonly occur in Nigeria, affecting prescribing behavior. There is no specific regulation in place to protect against ensuing conflicts. There is a need to put in place educational programs to increase awareness among physicians of the effects of such interactions, while also instituting and implementing stringent policies curtailing physician–pharmaceutical industry and PSR relationships.

Extent of physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Pharmaceutical companies spend large amounts of money promoting their products to physicians. There is evidence that physicians' interactions with pharmaceutical companies negatively affect their prescribing patterns. The objective of this study was to systematically review the extent of the relationship between physicians and pharmaceutical companies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Studies assessing the extent of any type of interaction between practicing physicians and pharmaceutical companies were eligible. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases in July 2016. Reviewers worked in duplicate and independently to complete study selection, data abstraction and assessment of methodological features. We summarized the findings narratively. We included 11 eligible studies (7 quantitative and 4 qualitative). Quantitative studies found that pharmaceutical company representatives visited at least 90% of physicians. Printed material, stationery items and drug samples were the most frequently received gifts. Two of the studies assessing direct payment found percentages of 16 and 5%, respectively. Findings of qualitative studies were consistent with those of quantitative studies. In addition, they revealed an increasing tendency for pharmaceutical companies to provide expensive personal gifts, sponsor social events and offer cash as inducements to physicians based on their demands. They also identified building personal relationships, creating a sense of indebtedness and emotional blackmailing as commonly used techniques to influence physicians. A relatively high percentage of physicians in LMICs interact with pharmaceutical companies. Findings have implications for policy and practice, given the current extent of interaction is likely affecting the prescribing habits and professional behaviour of physicians.

Knowledge, Beliefs and Attitudes of Patients and the General Public towards the Interactions of Physicians with the Pharmaceutical and the Device Industry: A Systematic Review.

ObjectiveTo systematically review the evidence on the knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of patients and the general public towards the interactions of physicians with the pharmaceutical and the device industry.MethodsWe included quantitative and qualitative studies addressing any type of interactions between physicians and the industry. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE in August 2015. Two reviewers independently completed data selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological features. We summarized the findings narratively stratified by type of interaction, outcome and country.ResultsOf the 11,902 identified citations, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria. Many studies failed to meet safeguards for protecting from bias. In studies focusing on physicians and the pharmaceutical industry, the percentages of participants reporting awareness was higher for office-use gifts relative to personal gifts. Also, participants were more accepting of educational and office-use gifts compared to personal gifts. The findings were heterogeneous for the perceived effects of physician-industry interactions on prescribing behavior, quality and cost of care. Generally, participants supported physicians’ disclosure of interactions through easy-to-read printed documents and verbally. In studies focusing on surgeons and device manufacturers, the majority of patients felt their care would improve or not be affected if surgeons interacted with the device industry. Also, they felt surgeons would make the best choices for their health, regardless of financial relationship with the industry. Participants generally supported regulation of surgeon-industry interactions, preferably through professional rather than governmental bodies.ConclusionThe awareness of participants was low for physicians’ receipt of personal gifts. Participants also reported greater acceptability and fewer perceived influence for office-use gifts compared to personal gifts. Overall, there appears to be lower awareness, less concern and more acceptance of surgeon-device industry interactions relative to physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions. We discuss the implications of the findings at the patient, provider, organizational, and systems level.

An intellectual virtue "vaccination" for physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions.

The pharmaceutical industry's wide range of interactions with physicians, trainees, and other medical professionals--interactions that include information transfer and financial incentives--has been the source of undue influences, especially on physicians' prescription behavior. Current literature has mainly been focused on the financial element of these influences, and the problems in medical professional-pharmaceutical industry interactions are mainly viewed in terms of conflicts of interest. There is often the assumption that physicians are intellectually competent but biased because of financial incentives.The author rejects that assumption and proposes an alternative explanation for the observed influence of the pharmaceutical industry on physicians' behavior by emphasizing the importance of the information-transfer side of the interactions and maintaining that physicians and other medical professionals need certain intellectual virtues (i.e., competencies) to properly assess the information, which is often unreliable and biased. These virtues are necessary for the practice of modern medicine and include mindfulness, the ability to understand practical implications of newly found evidence, to consider alternative explanations of data, to recognize and correct errors, to decide on the best available evidence, and to tailor that to the needs and values of individual patients. On the basis of this view, the author recommends that the best solution for the observed problems in physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions is to "vaccinate" physicians and other medical professionals by increasing efforts to inculcate the necessary intellectual virtues early in medical education and fostering them throughout those individuals' professional lives.

What do Canadians think about physician–pharmaceutical industry interactions?

BackgroundMany health professional and regulatory groups have guidelines for identifying, disclosing and managing potential conflicts of interest (COI). The opinions of the Canadian public regarding what constitutes COI are unknown. MethodsBilingual telephone survey in all provinces using a validated questionnaire on public opinions on physician–pharmaceutical industry interactions (POPPII). Adults 18 years or older were contacted using random digit dialing (RDD) with representative national sampling of households. Results were analyzed for predictors of opinions and were compared with the reference COI guideline. Two follow-up focus groups were held. Results1041 participants (56.8% female, mean age 52.6 years (SD 16.5), 18.2% francophone, 57.7% with post-secondary education) completed the survey. 34.0% reported a prior concern about physician–pharmaceutical industry relationships. Acceptability of interactions varied from high for requesting information about a particular drug or small gifts of obvious educational value to the patient, to mixed for free meals to listen to pharmaceutical industry personnel or payment to attend a conference, to low for research recruitment fees, personal use of medication samples or for using information not yet public about a new drug to make investment decisions. Age of the participant influenced ratings of acceptability. There was reasonable agreement (>60% participants) with only half of the related reference COI guideline statements. ConclusionsPublic opinions on physician–pharmaceutical industry interactions differ depending on the scenario but suggest a significant level of concern regarding interactions involving direct financial benefit to physicians.

의료인-제약산업 관계의 이해상충과 윤리적 원칙

This article examines the four principles of biomedical ethics introduced by Beauchamp and Childress for possible use in deliberating ethical issues that arise in the context of physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions (PPII). PPII is regarded as a threat to the ideal physician-patient relationship because it blurs the scientific, objective, and altruistic ideals of professional medical practice. Several guidelines have been proposed to redress the undesirable effects of PPII, but few have provided any ethical justification or mechanism to resolve possible internal conflicts. The principle-based approach is a good starting point because it focuses on practical solutions for decision-making as well as on theoretical justifications. This article shows how the four ethical principles can be specified and applied in three hypothetical cases of PPII, and how two practical rules, the rule of transparency and avoidance, can be assimilated.

Public Perceptions of Physician–Pharmaceutical Industry Interactions: A Systematic Review

Interactions between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry have led to concerns about conflict of interest (COI), resulting in COI guidelines that suggest a threshold beyond which interactions may be considered unacceptable. Guidelines have also outlined the importance of public opinion on the topic. Consequently, we conducted a systematic review to determine the Canadian public's opinions of physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions. A systematic review of the standard health sciences literature as well as grey literature was conducted and a number of experts were contacted. Pre-determined eligibility criteria were used to identify appropriate studies. Meta-analysis of the study findings was not possible owing to the variety of methods of reporting outcomes, the types of interactions studied and the diversity of populations studied. No studies on Canadian opinions were identified. Ten international studies (n=13,637), seven with patient groups and three with public citizens, were identified that examined opinions on aspects of awareness, acceptability, disclosure and perceived effects of physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions. Heterogeneity was observed in the awareness, acceptability and perceived effects of physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions; however, there appeared to be greater acceptability and fewer perceived effects with smaller, less costly interactions that directly benefit patients or a medical practice. Desire for disclosure of these interactions was consistent across studies. Research on the public's perception of physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions has been inadequate internationally and non-existent in Canada, and is urgently needed to help shape policies regarding potential conflict of interest.

Ethical Issues in Physician-Pharmaceutical Industry Interactions

Ethical Issues in Physician-Pharmaceutical Industry Interactions

Understanding Physician-Pharmaceutical Industry Interactions: A Concise Guide

Understanding Physician-Pharmaceutical Industry Interactions: A Concise Guide

A Prospective Before-and-After Trial of an Educational Intervention about Pharmaceutical Marketing

There is increasing evidence that physicians may be compromised by their interactions with the pharmaceutical industry. The authors aimed to develop and determine the effect of an educational intervention to inform family medicine residents about pharmaceutical marketing. Confidential, self-administered questionnaires were administered to family medicine residents at McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada, immediately before and after a two-part, 2.5-hour educational intervention. The curriculum consisted of (1) a faculty-led debate and discussion of a systematic review of physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions, and (2) an interactive workshop that included a presentation highlighting key empirical findings, a video illustrating techniques to optimize pharmaceutical sales representatives' visits, and small- and large-group problem-based discussions. Residents were asked about their attitudes toward five marketing strategies: drug samples, industry-sponsored continuing medical education, one-on-one interactions with sales representatives, free meals, and gifts worth less than CAN $10. A total of 37 residents responded to both questionnaires. After the intervention residents had more cautious attitudes, rating marketing strategies on a five-point Likert scale as less ethically appropriate (-0.41, p < .05) and less valuable to patients or useful to the resident (-0.39, p < .05), and reporting less intention to use them in the future (-0.44, p < .01). This intervention appears to have promoted more cautious attitudes toward pharmaceuticals marketing. Its long-term sustainability and effect on behavior remain unknown.

What residents don't know about physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions.

Little is known about the knowledge and skills internal medicine residents need to interact appropriately with pharmaceutical industry representatives. The authors conducted a needs assessment of current knowledge and preferences for potential components of a new educational initiative among residents. In 2001, a two-page questionnaire using a five-point ordinal scale was mailed to all internal medicine residents and faculty at one institution. Analysis included use of Wilcoxon two-sample test. Response rates were 97% (85/88) for residents and 79% (86/109) for faculty. Residents and faculty's knowledge about formal position statements or literature on the impact of marketing strategies on prescribing patterns, drug marketing costs, or how pharmaceutical representatives are trained to interact with physicians was very limited. Most responders felt residents should learn to critically interpret promotional materials, recognize potential for conflict of interest, and consider how patients perceive the physician-pharmaceutical industry relationship. More faculty than residents valued including position statements (66% versus 39%, p <.001) and literature exploring the impact of marketing on prescribing patterns (70% versus 41%, p <.001) in education. Only one-half or fewer favored small-group discussions, lecture series, critical-reading skills seminars, or panel discussions. Internal medicine residents and faculty reported low levels of knowledge about physician-pharmaceutical industry relationships. Some consensus about educational components existed, but optimal educational formats remain uncertain. A six-hour curriculum to address this complex, emotionally charged topic was developed, implemented, and evaluated.