The Effects of Public Disclosure of Industry Payments to Physicians on Patient Trust: A Randomized Experiment

Healthcare consumers' perceptions of incentive-linked prescribing: A scoping review

Incentive-linked prescribing (ILP) is considered a controversial practice universally. If incentivised, physicians may prioritise meeting pharmaceutical sales targets through prescriptions, rather than considering patients' health and wellbeing. Despite the potential harms of ILP to patients and important stakeholders in the healthcare system, healthcare consumers (HCCs) which include patients and the general public often have far less awareness about the practice of pharmaceutical incentivisation of physicians. We conducted a scoping review to explore what existing research says about HCCs' perceptions of the financial relationship between physicians and pharmaceutical companies. To conduct this scoping review, we followed Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage framework: identifying research questions, identifying relevant studies, selecting eligible studies, data charting, and collating, summarising, and reporting results. We also used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses' extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), as a guide to organise the information in this review. Quantitative and qualitative studies with patients and the general public, published in the English language were identified through searches of Scopus, Medline (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), and Google Scholar. Three themes emerged through the analysis of the 13 eligible studies: understanding of incentivisation, perceptions of hazards linked to ILP, and HCCs' suggestions to address it. We found documentation that HCCs exhibited a range of knowledge from good to insufficient about the pharmaceutical incentivisation of physicians. HCCs perceived several hazards linked to ILP such as a lack of trust in physicians and the healthcare system, the prescribing of unnecessary medications, and the negative effect on physicians' reputations in society. In addition to strong regulatory controls, it is critical that physicians self-regulate their behaviour, and publicly disclose if they have any financial ties with pharmaceutical companies. Doing so can contribute to trust between patients and physicians, an important part of patient-focused care and a contributor to user confidence in the wider health system.

Industry Payments to US Physicians by Specialty and Product Type

This study examines the distribution of payments within and across specialties and the medical products associated with the largest total payments.

Characterizing industry payments to ophthalmologists before and after onset of the COVID-19 pandemic

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic had profound effects on many different aspects of our healthcare system and the relationship between industry and physicians was no exception. The present database study evaluates industry payments to ophthalmologists in order to identify whether there are significant differences in industry payments to ophthalmologists before and after onset of the pandemic.

Methods

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments Database was queried for all ophthalmologists who received industry payments between 2018 and 2021. Pre-Covid was defined as 2018-2019 while post-Covid was defined as 2020-2021. Payment date, value, type, company making payment, and state of recipient were recorded. The top ten companies and states in terms of payment value were included in analysis. Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) modeling was used to assess significance.

Results

There were 729,263 industry payments to 20,832 ophthalmologists totaling $817,892,867.54 included for analysis in this study. We found that there was a significant increase in the mean value of research payments and a significant decrease in the mean value of general payments after the onset of the pandemic (both p < 0.001). We also report significant changes in industry payments to ophthalmologists based on the company making the payment and the state in which the ophthalmologist practices.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that significant differences exist in industry payment patterns to ophthalmologists following onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding underlying reasons for the observed differences may improve our understanding of the relationship between industry and clinical ophthalmology.

Incentivisation practices and their influence on physicians' prescriptions: A qualitative analysis of practice and policy in Pakistan

Focus on profit-generating enterprise in healthcare can create conflicts of interest that adversely impact prescribing and pricing of medicines. Although a global challenge, addressing the impacts on quality of care is particularly difficult in countries where the pharmaceutical industry and physician lobby is strong relative to regulatory institutions. Our study characterises the range of incentives exchanged between the pharmaceutical industry and physicians, and investigates the differences between incentivisation practices and policies in Pakistan. In this mixed methods study, we first thematically analysed semi-structured interviews with 28 purposively selected for-profit primary-care physicians and 13 medical sales representatives from pharmaceutical companies working across Pakistan's largest city, Karachi. We then conducted a content analysis of policies on ethical practice issued by two regulatory bodies responsible in Pakistan, and the World Health Organization. This enabled a systematic comparison of incentivisation practices with what is considered 'prohibitive' or 'permissive' in policy. Our findings demonstrate that incentivisation of physicians to meet pharmaceutical sales targets is the norm, and that both parties play in the symbiotic physician-pharma incentivisation dynamics. Further, we were able to categorise the types of incentive exchanged into one of five categories: financial, material, professional or educational, social or recreational, and familial. Our comparison of incentivisation practices with policies revealed three reasons for such widespread incentivisation linked to sales targets: first, some clear policies were being ignored by physicians; second, there are ambiguous or contradictory policies with respect to specific incentive types; and third, numerous incentive types are unaddressed by existing policies, such as pharmaceutical companies paying for private clinic renovations. There is a need for policies to be clarified and updated, and to build buy-in for policy enforcement from pharmaceutical companies and physicians, such that transgressions on target-driven prescribing are seen to be unethical.

CMS Open Payments Database Analysis of Industry Payments for Foot and Ankle Surgery Research

With decreasing federal funding, the role of industry in supporting medical investigations continues to grow. To increase transparency between physicians and industry, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services introduced the Open Payments Program, providing a searchable database of physician payments from entities including medical device companies. This study describes industry research payments and trends among foot and ankle surgeons. Research Payment Data among foot and ankle surgeons from the Open Payments Database was reviewed from 2013 through 2020. Payment year, value, type, and physician name were collected, and descriptive statistics were presented. Linear regression assessed trends in the number and value of payments. Analysis of variance and subsequent post hoc testing assessed differences in mean payment value. A p value of ≤.05 was considered statistically significant. Overall, 10,872 payments totaling $69,595,393.10 among 446 foot and ankle surgeons were analyzed. No statistically significant increase in number of physicians, payments, or mean payment value per physician was observed from 2013 through 2020. However, the average value of payments in 2019 and 2020 was greater than 2015 and 2017 (p ≤ .05). The top 50 physicians according to cumulative payment value received $54,696,623.10 with 9427 (86.7%) cash and cash-equivalent payments representing the most common payment type overall. Industry continues to provide financial support to foot and ankle surgery research. Results of this investigation spur future studies to examine the relationship between payments and positive results reported by lead investigators in published research.

Pharmaceutical Sales Representatives in the United States and China: The Need for Professional Public Space

Pharmaceutical sales representatives (PSRs) are one of the most frequently used drug information sources for physicians in both the United States and China. During face-to-face interactions, PSRs use various promotional strategies to impact the prescribing behavior. In the United States, PSRs provide physicians small gifts, free drug samples, and “sincere friendships”, whereas in China, they played an indispensable role in medical corruption over the past three decades. To cope with the undue influence of PSRs, both these countries have taken positive but insufficient measures to eliminate the effect thus far. By comparing the strategies of American and Chinese PSRs, it was found that building a friendly personal relationship with physicians in a relatively closed private environment (such as physician’s office) is a key factor to exert an individualized influence on physicians, even in different social backgrounds and healthcare contexts. Therefore, this essay suggests that it is necessary to limit the establishment of personal relationships and maintain a more professional interaction to reduce the personalized psychological and emotional influences on physicians’ professional judgment. To achieve this goal, it is proposed to transfer the physician-PSR interaction to a professional public space as a supplement to current countermeasures and suggestions. The presence of others and the possibility of third party participation will stimulate more ethical and reputational concerns. It is hoped that the increased transparency of the interaction will promote participants to consider more professional norms and mitigate the undue influence of PSRs’ individualized strategies.

Perceptions of Financial Conflict of Interest and Knowledge of the Sunshine Act Among Orthopedic Surgery Patients

The orthopedic surgical specialty is strongly tied to partnerships with industry that have fostered innovation and greatly enhanced patient care. A substantial number of orthopedic surgeons currently receive some form of industry support. These relationships are highly scrutinized because they present the possibility of both personal and financial conflicts of interest (COI). The authors examined orthopedic patients' awareness of existing regulation and perceptions of financial COI by performing a prospective survey-based study of patients seen in an academic orthopedic department. Data were collected during 1 year, in a cross-section of hospital-based and community clinical settings. The authors collected 513 surveys during a 1-year period between 4 clinical locations. Of all respondents, 55% were unconcerned regarding gifts or direct compensation their physicians received from industry, and only 16% were very or extremely concerned regarding these benefits. Patients' opinions regarding possible influence of benefits were similarly ambivalent, with 54% of patients minimally or not at all concerned regarding the potential influence of industry gifts or compensation. Seventy-six percent of patients had never heard of the Sunshine Act, and only 3% indicated that they were aware of the legislation and its intention. The income of the respondents and their level of education were positively correlated with increased concern about handling of COI, as well as knowledge regarding the Sunshine Act. These data suggest that orthopedic surgery patients are widely unconcerned regarding physician COI, but specific subsets of patients may be more likely to have concerns regarding these relationships. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(5):e682-e686.].

A Ray of Sunshine: Transparency in Physician-Industry Relationships Is Not Enough

Gifts from pharmaceutical and medical device companies to physicians in the United States have been reported since 2014, through the Physician Payments Sunshine Act. Although researchers have utilized these data to publish many studies on conflicts of interest (COIs) and prescribing behavior, there is no evidence that physician behavior regarding COI has changed, or that employers, meeting organizers, or medical journals are excluding physicians based on conflicts of interest. Disclosure is necessary but not sufficient to address the damage that industry relationships causes to medical knowledge and public health.

Increasing Consulting Fee Payments to Interventional Radiologists in the United States From Industry, 2014 to 2018: Analysis of the Open Payments Database

PURPOSE

To evaluate trends in consulting fees from industry to US-based interventional radiologists from 2014 to 2018.

METHODS

Payments to interventional radiologists from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, were analyzed from the CMS Open Payments Database. Payment type, total consulting fee payments per year and total payment per physician, and aggregate payments per company were analyzed before and after adjustment for outliers.

RESULTS

Over the 5-year period, a total of $79.8 million was paid from industry to interventional radiologists, of which $17.6 million (22.1%) represented consulting fees. Per physician, the median total yearly amount paid as consulting fees was $5,050. Consulting fees increased from a total of $2.8 million per year in 2014 to $4.6 million per year in 2018 (+65%). After adjustment for outliers, consulting fee payments rose from $1.8 million to $3.5 million (+94%). The number of physicians paid each year increased from 156 to 219 physicians and the median payment increased from $4,327 to $5,419. Before ($5,118,966) and after adjustment, Sirtex Medical Inc paid the highest total aggregate consulting fee payments per year to self-identified interventional radiologists. After expansion to include both interventional and diagnostic radiologists by specialty type, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp ($21,505,861) and Pfizer Inc ($11,798,255) followed by Sirtex Medical Inc ($8,276,818) paid the highest total aggregate in consulting fees.

CONCLUSION

Total consulting fees to interventional radiologists increased between 2014 and 2018 by 65%, driven by both the increased number of physicians paid consulting fees and the increased average payment amount.

The Influence of the Sunshine Act on Industry Payments to United States Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Surgeons

PURPOSE

The purpose of the present study is to investigate trends in overall payments to orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons reported by the Open Payments Database (OPD) over the 6 full years of available data (2014-2019).

METHODS

A retrospective review of industry payments to United States sports medicine trained orthopaedic surgeons from 2014 to 2019 was performed using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services OPD. Total payments and subtype payments were analyzed for yearly trends. Regional analysis was also performed. The primary outcome was the overall trend in total median payments (defined as the median total payments per surgeon per year), which was assessed via the Jonckheere-Terpstra test. Descriptive statistics include medians with interquartile ranges. P values < .05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

From 2014 to 2019, there were a total of 1,941,772 payments to 12,816 sports medicine orthopaedic surgeons. The median payments to surgeons demonstrated a significant upward trend (P < .001). The total number of payments (r = 0.002; P = .99) did not significantly correlate with changing year. The top 5 compensated surgeons received 45.8% of all industry contributions with a median total payment of $9,210,974.06 (interquartile range: 25,029,951.46). The majority of industry contributions in the top 5 earners were attributed to royalties and licenses (98.7%). Across the study period, 89.4% of the total orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons received a yearly total payment less than $10,000, which made up 8.3% of the total industry payment sum. Those receiving a yearly total payment greater than $500,000 accounted for 0.3% of surgeons but received 53.4% of the sum payments. We found a yearly increasing trend in payments in all regions including the Midwest, South, Northeast, and West (P < .001, P < .001, P < .001, and P = .006).

CONCLUSION

Despite the transparency of reporting mandated by the Sunshine Act, orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons have continued to maintain industry relationships with a notable disparity in distribution.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Our analysis suggests continued relationships among sports medicine surgeons and industry. Future research is needed to determine how this impacts medical practice in the United States.

Addressing Conflicts of Interest in Health and Medicine: Current Evidence and Implications for Patient Decision Aid Development

BACKGROUND

More stringent policies for addressing conflicts of interest have been implemented around the world in recent years. Considering the value of revisiting conflict of interest quality standards set by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration, we sought to review evidence relevant to 2 questions: 1) What are the effects of different strategies for managing conflicts of interest? and 2) What are patients' perspectives on conflicts of interest?

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review of English-language articles and abstracts from 2010 to 2019 that reported relevant quantitative or qualitative research.

RESULTS

Of 1743 articles and 118 abstracts identified, 41 articles and 2 abstracts were included. Most evidence on the effects of conflict of interest management strategies pertained only to subsequent compliance with the management strategy. This evidence highlighted substantial noncompliance with prevailing requirements. Evidence on patient perspectives on conflicts of interest offered several insights, including the existence of diverse views on the acceptability of conflicts of interest, the salience of conflict of interest type and monetary value to patients, and the possibility that conflict of interest disclosure could have unintended effects. We identified no published research on the effects of IPDAS Collaboration conflict of interest quality standards on patient decision making or outcomes.

LIMITATIONS

Because we did not conduct a systematic review, we may have missed some evidence relevant to our review questions. In addition, our team did not include patient partners.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review have implications for the management of conflicts of interest not only in patient decision aid development but also in clinical practice guideline development, health and medical research reporting, and health care delivery.

Review of Industry Payments to General Orthopaedic Surgeons Reported by the Open Payments Database: 2014 to 2019

Introduction:

The Physician Payments Sunshine Act was placed into law in 2010 in an effort to create transparency between physicians and industry. Along with many other specialties, orthopaedic surgeons have long worked intimately with medical industry companies. This study aimed to evaluate trends in industry payments to general orthopaedic surgeons from 2014 to 2019.

Methods:

A retrospective review of the Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services' Open Payments Database was done to identify all industry payments to all general orthopaedic surgeons (ie, not subspecialty affiliated) from 2014 to 2019. The researchers analyzed total payments and subtype payments for yearly trends, and a regional analysis was done. The primary outcome was the overall trend in total median payments, which was assessed through the Jonckheere-Terpstra test. Descriptive statistics include medians with interquartile ranges. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

Between 2014 and 2019, a total of 1,330,543 payments totaling $1.79 billion dollars was paid to 108,041 general orthopaedic surgeons. During this time, the number of surgeons receiving payments increased with a significant uptrend in median payments per surgeon (P < 0.001; Table 1). The top 25% percentile of general orthopaedic surgeons received >95% of payments, whereas the bottom 25% received <0.1%. The general payment types all saw significant increases (P < 0.001) between 2014 and 2019, with the exception of “Ownership or Investment Interests” (P = 0.657) and “Royalty or License” (P = 0.517). Significant regional uptrends in median industry payments were also seen in the Midwest, Northeast, South, and West (P < 0.001). Four of the top five orthopaedic industry companies made payment increases between 2014 and 2019.

Conclusion:

Industry payments to general orthopaedic surgeons between 2014 and 2019 have increased with a considerable disparity in payments among the top-paid orthopaedic surgeons.

French Public Familiarity and Attitudes toward Clinical Research during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic put clinical research in the media spotlight globally. This article proposes a first measure of familiarity with and attitude toward clinical research in France. Drawing from the “Health Literacy Survey 2019” (HLS19) conducted online between 27 May and 5 June 2020 on a sample of the French adult population (N = 1003), we show that a significant proportion of the French population claimed some familiarity with clinical trials (64.8%) and had positive attitudes (72%) toward them. One of the important findings of this study is that positive attitudes toward clinical research exist side by side with a strong distancing from the pharmaceutical industry. While respondents acknowledged that the pharmaceutical industry plays an important role in clinical research (68.3%), only one-quarter indicated that they trust the industry (25.7%). Positive attitudes toward clinical trials were associated with familiarity with clinical trials (Odds Ratio, OR 2.97 [1.90–4.63]), financial difficulties (OR 0.63 [0.46–0.85]), as well as mistrust of doctors (0.48 [0.27–0.85]) and of scientists (OR 0.62 [0.38–0.99]). Although the French media provided a great deal of information on how clinical research works during the first months of the pandemic, there remains profound mistrust of the pharmaceutical industry in France. This suspicion can undermine crisis management, especially in the areas of vaccine development and preparation for future pandemics.

Trends in Industry Payments to Medical Oncologists in the United States Since the Inception of the Open Payments Program, 2014 to 2019

Importance

Given the potential for undue influence of industry-physician payments on oncology care, it is important to understand how a national transparency program may be associated with financial interactions between industry and medical oncologists.

Objective

To identify trends in industry payments to medical oncologists from 2014 to 2019 and determine if the implementation of the Open Payments program is associated with changes in the frequency or value of payments or any shift in the nature of industry-oncologist financial interactions.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective, population-based, observational cohort study analyzed Open Payments reports of industry payments made in 2014 to 2019 to a cohort of licensed medical oncologists practicing in the US in 2014, using data from the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System.

Exposures

Receipt of an industry payment from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

General industry payments to medical oncologists, including the proportion receiving payments, total annual value and number of payments, and average annual trends over time, by aggregate value and by nature-of-payment category. Trends over time were analyzed using linear regression and generalized estimating equations.

Results

In 2014 to 2019, there were 15 585 medical oncologists who received a total of 2.2 million industry payments with a total value of $509 million. The absolute number of oncologists receiving payments decreased from 10 498 in 2014 to 8918 in 2019 (-15.1%). The annual per-physician payment value decreased among those receiving less than $10 000 in aggregate by -3.2% yearly (95% CI, -4.1% to -2.3%; P < .001), but increased for those receiving more than $10 000. Payments increased for consulting (13.7%; 95% CI, 12.4%-15.0%; P < .001) and for entertainment, meals, travel or lodging, and gifts (0.8%; 95% CI, 0.1%-1.5%; P = .03).

Conclusions and Relevance

The number of medical oncologists accepting industry payments has decreased; however, high-value industry payments have been consolidated in a relatively small number of medical oncologists accepting higher payment values over time. The nature of payments has shifted toward consulting. These findings highlight the limitations of transparency without accountability.

What influences healthcare providers' prescribing decisions? Results from a national survey

BACKGROUND

Prior U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) surveys with healthcare providers (HCPs) have focused on attitudes toward direct-to-consumer advertising and have not specifically examined professionally-targeted prescription drug promotion. Similarly, there are no recent national surveys of HCPs examining their interactions with the pharmaceutical industry.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to use a national sample of HCPs to examine exposure to professionally-targeted prescription drug promotions and interactions with industry, and knowledge, attitudes and practices related to FDA approval of prescription drugs.

METHODS

An online national survey was conducted with 2000 HCPs representing primary care physicians (PCPs), specialists (SPs), physician assistants (PAs), and nurse practitioners (NPs). The sample was randomly drawn from WebMD's Medscape subscriber network, stratified by HCP group, and designed to yield target numbers of completed surveys in each group. Weights were computed to correct for unequal selection probabilities, differential response rates, and differential coverage and used to generalize completed surveys to a national population of PCPs, SPs, NPs, and PAs.

RESULTS

Exposure and attention to pharmaceutical promotions and contact with industry were significantly associated with reported increase in pharmaceutical industry influence on decisions about prescription drugs. SPs were significantly more likely to prescribe off-label and serve as opinion leaders for the pharmaceutical industry compared to other provider groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate pharmaceutical promotions directed at HCPs occur in many forms and are disseminated through multiple channels. By using a nationally representative sample of HCPs, this study provides population-level estimates for exposure and attention to prescription drug promotion and contact with industry and evidence for their influence on prescriber decisions. Findings from this study will help to inform FDA of HCP responses to and impacts of prescription drug promotion.

Organizing Online Health Content: Developing Hashtag Collections for Healthier Internet-Based People and Communities

Twitter use has increased among patients with cancer, advocates, and oncology professionals. Hashtags, a form of metadata, can be used to share content, organize health information, and create virtual communities of interest. Cancer-specific hashtags modeled on a breast cancer community, #bcsm, led to the development of a structured set of hashtags called the cancer tag ontology. In this article, we review how these hashtags have worked with the aim of describing our experience from 2011 to 2017. We discuss useful guidelines for the development and maintenance of health-oriented communities on Twitter, including possible challenges to community sustainability and opportunities for future improvement and research.

Financial Conflicts of Interest are of Higher Ethical Priority than "Intellectual" Conflicts of Interest

The primary claim of this paper is that intellectual conflicts of interest (COIs) exist but are of lower ethical priority than COIs flowing from relationships between health professionals and commercial industry characterized by financial exchange. The paper begins by defining intellectual COIs and framing them in the context of scholarship on non-financial COIs. However, the paper explains that the crucial distinction is not between financial and non-financial COIs but is rather between motivations for bias that flow from relationships and those that do not. While commitments to particular ideas or perspectives can cause all manner of cognitive bias, that fact does not justify denying the enormous power that relationships featuring pecuniary gain have on professional behaviour in term of care, policy, or both. Sufficient reason exists to take both intellectual COIs and financial COIs seriously, but this paper demonstrates why the latter is of higher ethical priority. Multiple reasons will be provided, but the primary rationale grounding the claim is that intellectual COIs may provide reasons to suspect cognitive bias but they do not typically involve a loss of trust in a social role. The same cannot be said for COIs flowing from relationships between health professionals and commercial industries involving financial exchange. The paper then assumes arguendo that the primary rationale is mistaken and proceeds to show why the claims that intellectual COIs are more significant than relationship-based COIs are dubious on their own merits. The final section of the paper summarizes and concludes.

Pitfalls and Safeguards in Industry-Funded Research

Background: Physicians should follow ethical principles in their relationships with industry and be mindful that such relationships—if they are perceived as conflicts of interest—can undermine trust in the patient-physician relationship.

Methods: By identifying potential pitfalls and safeguards that can help prevent problems, this article focuses on ensuring that physician-industry relationships do not result in ethical transgressions or cause damage to doctor-patient relationships.

Results: Patient trust in physicians can be undermined by the perception that a physician-investigator is operating in the best interest of the research rather than the best interest of the patient. Payments from the pharmaceutical industry to physician-investigators are transparent because of the Sunshine Act, and patients can easily determine if their personal physicians have received money from industry. Research subsidies from industry should represent fair market value for the work performed. Postmarketing trials with the primary goal of increasing familiarity with a drug and prescribing rates should be avoided. Medical societies play an important role in establishing standards for professional conduct.

Conclusion: Ethically sound actions in physician relationships with industry should be guided by professional standards, medical society guidelines, and local institutional policies.

Association Between Public Trust and Provider Specialty Among Physicians With Financial Conflicts of Interest

OBJECTIVES

To characterize public perception of physicians' conflicts of interest (COIs) across medical and surgical specialties.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional 6-arm randomized survey of a nonprobability sample from Amazon's Mechanical Turk occurred on December 11 to 16, 2018. Survey respondents were randomly assigned to vignettes that varied the physician specialty with COI. The primary outcome was mean difference in Mayer Trust, and the secondary outcome included the proportion who desire to discontinue care.

RESULTS

There were 1729 of 1920 respondents who completed the experiment (90.1% completion rate). Respondents were male (52.5%; n=907), white (71.4%; n=1234), and between the ages of 25 and 44 years (70.9%; n=1227). Mean ± SD Mayer Trust across the 6 specialties was 3.7±.60, with the only between-specialty differences observed for psychiatry compared with the other specialties (F=5.4; P<.001). The median dollar amount that would affect respondents' trust in a physician was $5000 (interquartile range, $100-$100,000). A total of 75.1% (n=1298) of respondents desired COI information, with 41.6% (n=720) discontinuing care. Age older than 34 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.7; 95%, CI, 0.49-0.99; P=.047), nonwhite race (aOR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.02-1.6; P=.03), educational attainment of 4 or more years of college (aOR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.05-1.6; P=.016), and physician specialty as a psychiatrist (aOR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.03-2.2; P=.034) were predictors for discontinuing care.

CONCLUSION

Public COI disclosure is a common method for managing financial conflicts. Although survey respondents were more likely to discontinue care with a physician with COI, they will act on this knowledge of COI differently depending on the specialty of the physician. The finding that psychiatry is an outlier may be a chance finding that warrants further confirmation. Continued efforts to ensure best practices for disclosure are required.

Factors associated with the public's trust in physicians in the context of the Lebanese healthcare system: a qualitative study

Background

The Lebanese public perceives the physician-patient relationship as flawed. The objectives of this study are to assess factors associated with the public’s trust in physicians in the context of the Lebanese healthcare system and to explore potential ways to enhance it.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study based on a grounded theory methodology using semi-structured interviews with members of the Lebanese public (not restricted to patients). We selected participants through convenience and maximum variation sampling approaches. The constant comparative analysis resulted in a theoretical framework that describes the factors influencing trust in physicians.

Results

Participants trusted an experienced, up-to-date, graduate of a North American or Western European school, working in a reputable hospital, with a high level of diagnostic skills. The personal characteristics that improved trust were physicians who are ‘non-materialistic’, have a good rapport, and have sufficient encounter time with patients. Social factors that enhance trust in the physician include: being a family member, recommended by a family member, featured in mainstream media, and/or having a good reputation. Trust increased compliance, loyalty despite occasional mistakes committed, high consultation fees, and negative attitudes towards the physician’s institution. Conversely, no trust led to severed therapeutic relationship and seeking second opinions.

Conclusion

The level of trust of members of the Lebanese public in physicians was affected by the personal characteristics of physicians, their practice or clinical skills, their interactions with the patient, finances, in addition to a number of social factors. Moreover, the level of trust had major implications on patients’ interactions with their physicians.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4354-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Financial conflicts of interest of clinicians making submissions to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review: a descriptive study

OBJECTIVES

This study examines financial conflict of interest (FCOI) of clinicians who made submissions to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR), the arm of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health that recommends whether oncology drug indications should be publicly funded. Final reports from pCODR published between October 2016 and February 2019 were examined.

DESIGN

Descriptive study.

DATA SOURCES

Website of pCODR.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

The primary outcome is the number of submissions declaring FCOI. Secondary outcomes are the number of times where clinicians agreed and disagreed with preliminary recommendation from pCODR and the association between the distribution of individual clinicians' FCOI and pCODR's funding recommendations.

RESULTS

There were 46 drug indication reports from pCODR. Clinicians made 261 submissions. Clinicians declared they received payments from companies 323 times and named 38 different companies making those payments a total of 500 times. Financial conflicts with drug companies were declared in 176 (66.3%) of all submissions. In 21 (45.7%) of the 46 drug indications, 50% or more of the clinicians had a conflict with the company making the drug. Clinicians commented on 37 preliminary recommendations. In all 25 where pCODR recommended funding or conditional funding, the clinicians either agreed or agreed in part. pCODR recommended that the drug indication not be funded 12 times and 9 times clinicians disagreed with that recommendation. The distribution of clinician responses was statistically significantly different depending on whether pCODR recommended funding/conditional funding or do not fund p<0.0001 (Fisher exact test). The distribution of clinicians' FCOI differed depending on whether the recommendation was fund/conditional fund or do not fund p=0.027 (Fisher exact test).

CONCLUSION

Financial conflicts with pharmaceutical companies are widespread among experts making submissions to the pCODR.

US Nationwide Disclosure of Industry Payments and Public Trust in Physicians

IMPORTANCE

Transparency of industry payments to physicians could engender greater public trust in physicians but might also lead to greater mistrust of physicians and the medical profession, adversely affecting the patient-physician relationship.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between nationwide public disclosure of industry payments and Americans' trust in their physicians and trust in the medical profession.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Survey study using difference-in-difference analyses of a national longitudinal survey comparing changes in states where industry payments were newly disclosed by Open Payments with changes in states where payments information was already available because of state sunshine laws. The US population-based surveys were conducted in September 2014-shortly before the initial public disclosure of industry payments-and again in September 2016. Final analyses were conducted September through December 2018. Participants were adults 18 years and older (n = 1388).

EXPOSURES

National public disclosure through Open Payments of payments made by pharmaceutical and medical device firms to physicians.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Wake Forest measure of trust in one's own physician and Wake Forest measure of trust in the medical profession.

RESULTS

Of the 3542 original survey respondents, 2180 (61.5%) completed the second survey 2 years later, and 1388 named the same most frequently seen physician in both surveys. The mean age of respondents at the time of the first survey was 53 years, and 749 (54.0%) were women. Race/ethnicity was white in 76.6% (1063 of 1388) and non-Hispanic black in 8.0% (111 of 1388). Public disclosure of payments was associated with lower trust in one's own physician regardless of whether respondents knew their physicians had received payments (decrease in Wake Forest measure of trust in one's own physician of 0.56 point; 95% CI, -0.79 to -0.32 point; P < .001). Open Payments was also associated with lower trust in the medical profession (decrease in Wake Forest measure of trust in the medical profession of 0.35 point; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.12 point; P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Nationwide public disclosure of industry payments may be associated with decreased trust in physicians and in the medical profession. More judicious presentation of payments information may counteract unintended negative trust and spillover consequences of public disclosure.

Exploring skin color and black-white differences in trust in physicians in a cross-sectional study of U.S. adults

BACKGROUND

Research on skin color inequality is growing, but few studies examine the health care context.

OBJECTIVE

This study explored associations between black and white respondents' skin color and their trust in physicians using the 2012 General Social Survey (n = 1026), which is a national survey of U.S. adults.

METHODS

Bivariate and multivariable analyses examined how trust in physician is related to skin color and race. Five items measuring trust were aggregated using three different methods (summation, averaging, scaling) and disaggregated (estimated one item at a time) in analyses.

RESULTS

Across the three aggregation methods, neither skin color nor race were independently related to trust. For the disaggregation method, darker skin was associated with less trust that physicians to discuss all treatment options among white females, black females, and black males. Among white males, darker skin increased this trust.

CONCLUSION

Aggregating trust items and relying on only self-reported race may produce false conclusions about a lack of racial differences. Skin color is associated with complex concerns about physicians withholding treatment, which may reduce shared decision-making and treatment adherence. Skin color should be tracked to better capture health care experiences and population health.

Assessment of Pharmaceutical Company and Device Manufacturer Payments to Gastroenterologists and Their Participation in Clinical Practice Guideline Panels

IMPORTANCE

Payments from pharmaceutical and device manufacturers to physicians may influence the advice physicians give patients and peers.

OBJECTIVES

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.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

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.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Payments made to gastroenterologists by pharmaceutical company and device manufacturers.

RESULTS

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%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

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.

Decoding disclosure: Comparing conflict of interest policy among the United States, France, and Australia

"Sunshine" policy, aimed at making financial ties between health professionals and industry publicly transparent, has recently gone global. Given that transparency is not the sole means of managing conflict of interest, and is unlikely to be effective on its own, it is important to understand why disclosure has emerged as a predominant public policy solution, and what the effects of this focus on transparency might be. We used Carol Bacchi's problem-questioning approach to policy analysis to compare the Sunshine policies in three different jurisdictions, the United States, France and Australia. We found that transparency had emerged as a solution to several different problems including misuse of tax dollars, patient safety and public trust. Despite these differences in the origins of disclosure policies, all were underpinned by the questionable assumption that informed consumers could address conflicts of interest. We conclude that, while transparency reports have provided an unprecedented opportunity to understand the reach of industry within healthcare, policymakers should build upon these insights and begin to develop policy solutions that address systemic commercial influence.

Towards Patient-Centered Conflicts of Interest Policy

Financial conflicts of interest exist between industry and physicians, and these relationships have the power to influence physicians' medical practice. Transparency about conflicts matters for ensuring adequate informed consent, controlling healthcare expenditure, and encouraging physicians' reflection on professionalism. The US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) launched the Open Payments Program (OPP) to publicly disclose and bring transparency to the relationships between industry and physicians in the United States. We set out to explore user awareness of the database and the ease of accessibility to disclosed information, however, as we show, both awareness and actual use are very low. Two practical policies can greatly enhance its intended function and help alleviate ethical tension. The first is to provide data for individual physicians not merely in absolute terms, but in meaningful context, that is, in relation to the zip code, city, and state averages. The second increases access to the OPP dataset by adding hyperlinks from physicians' professional websites directly to their Open Payments disclosure pages. These changes considerably improve transparency and the utility of available data, and can furthermore enhance professionalism and accountability by encouraging physicians to reflect more actively on their own practices.