Relationship between industry royalty and licensing payments and patent authorship among orthopedic spine surgeons

Academic Productivity at Orthopedic Spine Surgery Fellowships is Positively Correlated With Nonresearch Lifetime Industry Earnings: A Retrospective Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to assess the impact of academic productivity at both individual and program levels on lifetime industry earnings within US orthopedic spine fellowships.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Physician-industry transparency was codified by the Physician Payments Sunshine Act (PSSA) in 2010. No study has explored the relationship between academic productivity and industry earnings at the fellowship level.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria encompassed physicians with complete academic and industry data from orthopedic spine fellowship programs listed on the North American Spine Society (NASS) 2022-2023 fellowship directory. Academic productivity was defined via H-index on the Scopus website, and industry productivity by total lifetime earnings on the Open Payments Database (OPD).

RESULTS

This analysis included 75 orthopedic spine fellowship programs with 320 individual physicians. Median individual physician lifetime earnings were $86,852.71 (mean: $666,580.23 ± $1,887,734.64; minimum-maximum: $10.86-$27,164,431.49) and the median individual physician (n=320 physicians) H-index was 17.0 (mean: 21.82 ± 19.28; minimum-maximum: 0-109). Median combined physician H-index per fellowship (n=75 fellowships) was 65.0 (mean: 93.08 ± 85.67; minimum-maximum: 3-434) and median combined physician lifetime earnings was $927,771.60 (mean: $2,844,075.64 ± $4,942,089.56; minimum-maximum: $1,112.32-$29,983,900.69). A positive correlation was observed between academic productivity and industry productivity at an individual level (P<0.001; Spearman's rho = 0.467). This correlation was stronger at the fellowship level (P<0.001; Spearman's rho = 0.734). There was no significant difference in total lifetime earnings (P=0.369) or H-index per fellowship (P=0.232) when stratified by region of the fellowship program in the United States.

CONCLUSION

Orthopedic spine surgery fellowship programs in the United States exhibit a positive correlation between academic productivity and nonresearch industry lifetime earnings at both individual and program levels. This correlation is stronger at the program level, and regional differences among fellowship programs do not significantly impact academic or industry productivity.

2015-2021 Industry Payments to Pediatric Orthopaedic Surgeons: Analysis of Trends and Characteristics of Top-earning Surgeons

BACKGROUND

Analysis of industry payments to pediatric orthopaedic surgeons last occurred in 2017. We investigated payments to pediatric orthopaedic surgeons from 2015 to 2021 to understand surgeon characteristics associated with increased industry payments.

METHODS

Open Payments Database datasets from 2015 to 2021 were queried for nonresearch payments to pediatric orthopaedic surgeons. Annual aggregates and subcategories were recorded. For surgeons receiving payments in 2021, the Hirsch index (h-index), gender, and US census division were found using the Scopus database, Open Payments Database, and online hospital profiles, respectively. χ 2 , Fisher exact, Mann-Whitney U , and t tests were used to compare surgeons in the top 25%, 10%, and 5% payment percentiles to the bottom 75%, 90%, and 95%, respectively.

RESULTS

Payments rose 125% from 2015 to 2021. Education, royalties, and faculty/speaker increased most, while travel/lodging, honoraria, charitable contributions, and ownership interest decreased. Only royalties increased from 2019 to 2021. In 2021, of 419 pediatric orthopaedic surgeons receiving industry payments, men received greater median aggregate payments than women ($379.03 vs. $186.96, P =0.047). There were no differences in gender proportions between the top 75% and bottom 25% ( P =0.054), top 10% and bottom 90% ( P =0.235), and top 5% and bottom 95% ( P =0.280) earning comparison groups. The h-index was weakly positively correlated with industry payments ( rs =0.203, P <0.001). Mean h-indices in the 75th ( P <0.001, 95% CI: 2.62-7.65), 90th ( P =0.001, 95% CI: 3.28-13.03), and 95th ( P =0.005, 95% CI: 4.25-21.11) percentiles were significantly higher. Proportions of surgeons from the Middle Atlantic and West South Central in the 90th ( P =0.025) and 95th percentiles ( P =0.033), respectively, were significantly lower compared to all other regions. A higher proportion of surgeons from the Pacific were placed in the 90th ( P =0.004) and 95th ( P =0.024) percentiles.

CONCLUSIONS

Industry payments to pediatric orthopaedic surgeons rose from 2015 to 2021. Most categories fell from 2019 to 2021, which may be related to the SARS-CoV-19 pandemic. In 2021, though gender was not related to aggregate payment percentile, location in select US census divisions and h-index was.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II-Retrospective study.

Differences in Financial Conflicts of Interest Among Participants in a National Spine Conference

STUDY

Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVE

At the North American Spine Society (NASS) conference, participants may influence spine surgery practices and patient care through their contributions. Therefore, their financial conflicts of interest are of notable interest. This study aims to compare the demographics and payments made to participating surgeons.

METHODS

A list of 151 spine surgeons was created based on those who participated in the 2022 NASS conference. Demographic information was obtained from public physician profiles. General payments, research payments, associated research funding, and ownership interest were collected for each physician. Descriptive statistics and two-tailed t-tests were used.

RESULTS

In 2021, 151 spine surgeon participants received industry payments, totaling USD 48 294 115. The top 10% of orthopedic surgeons receiving payments accounted for 58.7% of total orthopedic general value, while the top 10% of neurosurgeons accounted for 70.1%. There was no significant difference between these groups' general payment amounts. Surgeons with 21-30 years of experience received the most general funding. There was no difference in funding between surgeons in academic or private settings. For all surgeons, royalties accounted for the largest percentage of the general value exchanged, while food/beverage accounted for the largest percentage of transactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that only years of experience had a positive association with general payments, and most monetary value belonged to a small handful of surgeons. These participants receiving significant money may promote techniques requiring products of companies providing their compensation. Future conferences may require disclosure policy changes so attendees understand the degree of funding participants receive.

Industry Payments Among Appropriate Use Criteria Voting Panels: An Open Payments Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although multiple studies have consistently demonstrated that orthopaedic surgeons receive greater transfers of value than other specialties, the industry payments of providers who are involved in the formation of practice guidelines have not been thoroughly explored. Therefore, the purpose of our analysis was to evaluate the industry payments of the authors of the Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS).

METHODS

The publicly available AAOS web portal (OrthoGuidelines.org) was queried for all AUCs that had been released between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2019, regarding the management of musculoskeletal pathologies. A cross-sectional analysis of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Open Payments database was conducted to determine the number and total value of industry payments to AUC voting committee members during the year of voting for the AUC. Industry payments for each orthopaedic surgeon voting member were compared with payments received by orthopaedic surgeons nationwide who received any payment within the same year. The proportion of orthopaedic surgeon voting members who received any industry payment was compared with the proportion of orthopaedic surgeons nationwide who received payments.

RESULTS

Our analysis included a total of 18 different AUCs with 216 voting members, 157 of whom were orthopaedic surgeons. Of the orthopaedic surgeon voting members, 105 (67%) received industry payments, a rate roughly comparable with the national average among orthopaedic surgeons (74%). For 7 of 18 AUCs (39%), the median payment per orthopaedic surgeon voting member was above the median among orthopaedic surgeons receiving payments nationwide that year. Qualitatively, orthopaedic surgeon voting members were more likely to receive payments in the form of royalties, licenses, or speaking fees than orthopaedic surgeons nationwide.

CONCLUSIONS

AUC voting members receive payments at frequencies and magnitudes that are roughly comparable with orthopaedic surgeons nationwide. Whether voting panel members receiving payments at these rates is ideal or is in the best interest of patients is a policy decision for the AAOS and society at large. Our study confirms that payments are common and, thus, continued vigilance is justified.