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

Conflict of Interest Disclosure in Oncology: Preliminary Insights From the Global ONCOTRUST-1 Cross-Sectional Study

PURPOSE

Conflicts of interest (COIs) between oncologists and industry might considerably influence how the presentation of the research results is delivered, ultimately affecting clinical decisions and policy-making. Although there are many regulations on reporting COI in high-income countries (HICs), little is known about their reporting in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Oncology Transparency Under Scrutiny and Tracking (ONCOTRUST-1) is a pilot global survey to explore the knowledge and perceptions of oncologists regarding COI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We designed an online 27-question-based survey in the English language to explore the perceptions and knowledge of oncologists regarding COI, with an emphasis on LMICs. Descriptive statistics and the Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies guidelines were used to report the findings.

RESULTS

ONCOTRUST-1 surveyed 200 oncologists, 70.9% of them practicing in LMICs. Median age of the respondents was 36 (range, 26-84) years; 47.5% of them were women. Of the respondents, 40.5% reported weekly visits by pharmaceutical representatives to their institutions. Regarding oncologists' perceptions of COI that require disclosure, direct financial benefits, such as honoraria, ranked highest (58.5%), followed by gifts from pharmaceutical representatives (50%) and travel grants for attending conferences (44.5%). By contrast, personal or institutional research funding, sample drugs, consulting or advisory board, expert testimony, and food and beverage funded by pharmaceutical industry were less frequently considered as COI. Moreover, only 24% of surveyed oncologists could correctly categorize all situations representing a COI.

CONCLUSION

These findings underscore the importance of clear guidelines, education, and transparency in reporting COI in oncology. This hypothesis-generating pilot survey provided the rationale for ONCOTRUST-2 study, which will compare perceptions of COI among oncologists in LMICs and HICs.

The healthcare field as a marketplace: general practitioners, pharmaceutical companies, and profit-led prescribing in Pakistan

Incentivisation of general practitioners (GPs) by pharmaceutical companies is thought to affect prescribing practices, often not in patients' interest. Using a Bourdieusian lens, we examine the socially structured conditions that underpin exchanges between pharmaceutical companies and GPs in Pakistan. The analysis of qualitative interviews with 28 GPs and 13 pharmaceutical sales representatives (PSRs) shows that GPs, through prescribing medicines, met pharmaceutical sales targets in exchange for various incentives. We argue that these practices can be given meaning through the concept of 'field' - a social space in which GPs, PSRs, and pharmacists were hierarchically positioned, with their unique capacities, to enable healthcare provision. However, structural forces like the intense competition between pharmaceutical companies, the presence of unqualified healthcare providers in the healthcare market, and a lack of regulation by the state institutions produced a context that enabled pharmaceutical companies and GPs to use the healthcare field, also, as space to maximise profits. GPs believed the effort to maximise incomes and meet socially desired standards were two key factors that encouraged profit-led prescribing. We conclude that understanding the healthcare field is an important step toward developing governance practices that can address profit-led prescribing.

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.

Changes in Japanese physicians' relationships with the pharmaceutical industry between 2008 and 2021: A national survey

BACKGROUND

A national survey we conducted in 2008 showed that many Japanese physicians interacted with and received gifts from pharmaceutical representatives (PRs) and had a positive attitude toward relationships with PRs. The revised promotion code of the Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association in 2019 prohibited the provision of non-educational promotional aids including sticky notes, mouse pads, and calendars. During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, face-to-face meetings were socially restricted. This study assessed the extent of current Japanese physicians' involvement in pharmaceutical promotional activities and their attitudes toward relationships with PRs and to ascertain any changes between 2008 and 2021. We also examined the factors that predicted positive attitudes toward gifts from PRs.

METHODS

From January to March 2021, we conducted a national mail survey of Japanese physicians in seven specialties: internal medicine, surgery, orthopedics, pediatrics, obstetrics-gynecology, psychiatry, and ophthalmology.

RESULTS

There were 1636 participants and the response rate was 63.2%. Most physicians met face-to-face with PRs (78.8%), whereas only a minority received meals outside the workplace (4.5%). PRs were thought to have an important role in continuing medical education (66.1%) and to provide accurate information about new drugs (74.2%). Opinions were divided on the appropriateness of gifts from PRs. Most thought that stationery and meals provided by the industry did not affect prescribing behavior (89.7% and 75.8%, respectively). Factors that predicted a positive attitude toward gifts from PRs were male, orthopedic specialty vs. internal medicine, more interactions with PRs, a positive attitude toward informational value, and no rules banning meetings with PRs.

CONCLUSION

Involvement in pharmaceutical promotional activities is still common among practicing physicians in Japan, although the extent of the involvement had declined. Rules banning meetings with PRs appear to continue being effective at limiting a physician's involvement with promotional activities and their critical attitudes toward gifts from PRs.

Pharmaceutical industry relationships with oncologists in sub-Saharan Africa

Health-care systems in sub-Saharan Africa are considered to be new markets for pharmaceutical companies. This perception is particularly relevant within oncology, as the pharmaceutical industry has changed strategic priorities in the past 10 years to focus on cancer. Since the 1930s, pharmaceutical companies have used advertisements, sample drugs, gifts, paid speaking engagements, advisory boards, and trips to conferences to influence clinical practice and policy. A large amount of literature describes the commonness of these practices and their effects on the behaviour of doctors. However, these data come almost exclusively from high-income countries. Industry-doctor relationships are increasingly common in sub-Saharan Africa and other low-income and middle-income countries. Although there are undoubtedly risks of industry engagement in low-income and middle-income countries, many programmes with educational, research, and clinical value would not occur in these countries without industry support. Thus, what is known about these relationships in high-income countries will not necessarily apply in low-income and middle-income countries. There is a need for widespread discussion about industry-oncologist interactions across the African continent and context-specific data to understand the potential risks and benefits of these relationships.

Adherence to WHO Criteria on Drug Promotion Literature: An Exploratory Study From a Tertiary Healthcare Facility in South-West Nigeria

Introduction: In many low and middle-income countries (LMIC), drug promotional literature (DPL) remains one of the main sources of drug information for physicians. Studies conducted in many LMICs showed poor compliance to the WHO guidelines for ethical drug promotion especially in the area of information about excipients, adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions and contra-indications. These inadequacies in the information provided may mislead the prescriber with potential adverse consequences among patients using the medicines. Nigeria has a big pharmaceutical sector which is poorly regulated and we hypothesize that such unethical drug promotional practices may exist. This study therefore set out to assess compliance to the WHO ethical drug promotion (using DPL) at the Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital (EKSUTH), Ado-Ekiti, South-West Nigeria. Methodology: This was a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted in several specialist clinics of EKSUTH, Ado-Ekiti. Printed DPLs (brochures and leaflets) were collected from these clinics, collated using a pre-designed data collection form and analyzed using the WHO ethical criteria for medicinal drug promotion. Results:Two hundred seventy-five DPLs were screened A total of out of which 234 DPLs were selected after screening to after removal of duplications. Only 5 (2.1%) DPLs met all the WHO criteria. DPLs promoting antibiotics, cardiovascular drugs, and vitamins/nutritional supplements were in the majority (22.2%, 17.1%, and 11.5% respectively. Most of the DPLs had the generic (223; 95.3%) and brand (234; 100%) names, active ingredients (209; 89.3%), excipients (149; 63.7%), and indications (232; 99.1%). Information about adverse drug reactions (76; 32.5%), contra-indications (73; 31.2%), and drug interactions (46; 19.7%) was less represented. Only 59 (25.2%) DPLs had references. Fixed-dose combination drugs made up 34.6% of drugs being promoted. Conclusion:The DPLs assessed in this study had low adherence to WHO ethical drug promotion criteria especially those related to adverse drug reaction, drug interactions, and contra-indications.

Interaction between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: A scoping review for developing a policy brief

Background

Payments to physicians by the pharmaceutical industry are common, but recent evidence shows that these payments influence physician prescribing behavior in the form of increased prescription of brand-name drugs, expensive and low-cost drugs, increased prescription of payer company drugs, etc. Considering that these payments increase drug costs for patients and health systems, there is a public interest in controlling them. Therefore, this study aimed to identify and propose policy options for managing physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions in the context of Iran's health system.

Methods

In the first phase, a systematic search was conducted to identify relevant policies and interventions in Web of Science, PubMed, and ProQuest databases from 2000 to 2022. Then, the opinions of the research team and an expert group (physicians, health policy and transparency experts, and industry representatives) were used to categorize the interventions and propose policy options along with their advantages, disadvantages, and implementation considerations.

Results

In the search, 579 articles were retrieved, and 44 articles were found suitable for the final analysis. Twenty-nine interventions and strategies were identified, and based on these; Five policy options were identified: prohibition, restriction, physician self-regulation, voluntary industry disclosure, and mandatory industry disclosure.

Conclusion

The proposed policies in our study include advantages, challenges, and implementation considerations based on up-to-date evidence that can help policymakers use them to manage COI in physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions in Iran's health system. A combination of measures seems to help manage COI: firstly, using self-regulating physicians and industry to institutionalize transparency, and in the next step, implementing mandatory industry disclosure policies and establishing restrictions on some financial interactions.

The attitude and acceptability towards medical promotional tools and their influence on physicians' prescribing practices in Jordan and Iraq: a cross-sectional study

Background

Pharmaceutical companies spend more than one-third of their sales revenue on marketing and promotion directed toward healthcare professionals. There has been a focus on the relationship between healthcare professionals and the pharmaceutical industry in recent years. This study aims to explore the attitude toward and acceptability of medical promotional tools and their influence on physicians’ prescribing practices in Jordan and Iraq.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey study was conducted to explore the influence of visits by medical representatives (MRs) and medical promotions on physicians’ prescribing practices between June and October 2020 in Jordan and Iraq. Previously validated questionnaires were used.

Results

A total of 801 physicians completed the questionnaires. Face-to-face visits, followed by the dispensing of medical samples, were the two most common promotional methods used by MRs. 48% of participating physicians reported that they would accept the promotional marketing tools offered to them. MRs focused on the key selling points of their product during medical promotions, and 39.6% of the physicians reported that MRs had a negative attitude toward their competitors’ products. 69.9% of the physicians reported that they would change their practice after participating in conferences or meetings.

Conclusion

Medical promotional tools have a clear influence on physicians’ prescribing practices in Jordan and Iraq. Therefore, medical promotion should be controlled and guided by clear and country-specific ethical guidelines. This will ensure safe medical promotion to physicians and optimise the healthcare practices provided to patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07525-1.

Antimicrobial resistance in low- and middle-income countries: current status and future directions

Introduction: Rising rates of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) globally continue to pose agrave threat to human health. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are disproportionately affected, partly due to the high burden of communicable diseases.Areas covered: We reviewed current trends in AMR in LMICs and examined the forces driving AMR in those regions. The state of interventions being undertaken to curb AMR across the developing world are discussed, and the impact of the current COVID-19 pandemic on those efforts is explored.Expert opinion: The dynamics that drive AMR in LMICs are inseparable from the political, economic, socio-cultural, and environmental forces that shape these nations. The COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated underlying factors that increase AMR. Some progress is being made in implementing surveillance measures in LMICs, but implementation of concrete measures to meaningfully impact AMR rates must address the underlying structural issues that generate and promote AMR. This, in turn, will require large infrastructural investments and significant political will.

Formulary Management Activities and Practice Implications Among Public Sector Hospital Pharmaceutical and Therapeutics Committees in a South African Province

Introduction

The World Health Organization identified Pharmaceutical and Therapeutics Committees (PTCs) at district and hospital levels as one of the pivotal models to promote rational use of medicines (RUM). This is endorsed by the Government in South Africa. Formulary development and management is one of the main functions of PTCs. This study aimed to describe the formulary management activities among PTCs in public hospitals in Gauteng Province, South Africa, following initiatives to promote RUM in South Africa.

Methods

Qualitative, nonparticipatory, observational study, observing 26 PTC meetings. Data were coded and categorized using NVivo9^® qualitative data analysis software. Themes and sub-themes were developed. The themes and sub-themes on formulary management are the principal focus of this paper.

Results

More than half of the observed PTCs reviewed their formulary lists. There was variation in the review process among institutions providing different levels of care. Various aspects were considered for formulary management especially requests for medicines to be added. These included cost considerations (mainly focusing on acquisition costs), evidence-based evaluation of clinical trials, patient safety, clinical experience and changes in the National Essential Medicines List (NEML). The tertiary PTCs mostly dealt with applications for new non-EML medicines, while PTCs in the other hospitals mainly requested removal or addition of EML medicines to the list.

Conclusion

This is the first study from Gauteng Province, South Africa, reporting on how decisions are actually taken to include or exclude medicines onto formularies within public sector hospitals providing different levels of care. Various approaches are adopted at different levels of care when adding to- or removing medicines from the formulary lists. Future programs should strengthen PTCs in specialized aspects of formulary management. A more structured approach to formulary review at the local PTC level should be encouraged in line with the national approach when reviewing possible additions to the NEML.

Conflict of Interest: Are Iranian Breast Cancer Specialists Prone to it?

Introduction:

Giving gifts is a common way to promote and encourage the use of products of trading companies and increase the patient referrals to diagnostic centers. The present study aimed to assess the practice of physicians of different (sub) specialties/educational levels engaged in breast cancer management in some conflict of interest (COI) situations in their relation with pharmaceutical companies and paraclinical centers.

Methods:

A self-administered online questionnaire including questions on demographic and professional information as well as the attitude of physicians toward COI by answering the questions in three different practical scenarios was developed. Respondents were asked to answer each question by selecting one of the five options: strongly agree, agree, undecided/neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree in their own practices as well as the same questions asking the same subject for what they think of the other physicians. Descriptive statistical analysis was used to report qualitative and quantitative variables.

Result:

The response rate was 66.24%. In general, physicians considered their performance better than that of other physicians in the situations asked. More than 90% stated that they would participate in the sponsorship congress for introducing new drugs. One fifth of the physicians stated that they would accept the 30% financial proposition for the referral of every single patient to other clinics. More than half of the physicians stated that they had considered the risks resulted from the COI for referring patients to private radiobiological centers.

Conclusion:

This study indicated that physicians in the field of breast cancer were at the risk of COI. Even within the medical field, there is not sufficient trust in the proper functioning of doctors in dealing with COI situations.

Pharmaceutical companies information and antibiotic prescription patterns: A follow-up study in Spanish primary care

Objectives

To assess the impact of sources of drug information on antibiotic prescribing patterns (quantity and quality) among primary care physicians.

Methods

We conducted a cohort study on primary care physicians who were actively engaged in medical practice in 2010 in a region in north-west Spain (Galicia), fulfilling inclusion criteria (n = 2100). As the independent variable, we took the perceived utility of 6 sources of information on antibiotics, as measured by the validated KAAR-11 questionnaire. As dependent variables, we used: (1) a quality indicator (appropriate quality, defined as any case where 6 of the 12 indicators proposed by the European Surveillance of Antimicrobial Consumption Network [ESAC-Net] were better than the mean values for Spain); and, (2) a quantity indicator (high prescribing), defined as any case where defined daily doses (DDD) per 1 000 inhabitants per day of antibacterials for systemic use were higher than the mean values for Spain. The adjusted odds ratio for a change in the interquartile range (IqOR) for each sources of information on antibiotics was calculated using Generalized Linear Mixed Models.

Results

The questionnaire response rate was 68%. Greater perceived utility of pharmaceutical sales representatives increases the risk of having high prescribing (1/IqOR = 2.50 [95%CI: 1.63–3.66]) and reduces the probability of having appropriate quality (1/IqOR = 2.28 [95%CI: 1.77–3.01]). Greater perceived utility of clinical guidelines increases the probability of having appropriate quality (1/IqOR = 1.25 [95%CI: 1.02–1.54]) and reduces the probability of high prescribing (1/IqOR = 1.25 [95%CI: 1.02–1.54]).

Conclusions

Sources of information on antibiotics are an important determinant of the quantity and quality of antibiotic prescribing in primary care. Commercial sources of information influence prescribing negatively, and clinical guidelines are associated with better indicators.

The intersections of industry with the health research enterprise

There is increased awareness of the negative impact of large multinational corporations - the 'industry' - on public health. These corporations have established different types of relationships with a number of actors in the field of health research. This Commentary explores the different types of relationships between the industry and the actors of health research, how they intersect with the different research steps, and how these relationships allow the industry to exert influence. The types of relationships discussed consist of funding of research, direct relationships with the actors of research (namely advocacy groups, funding agencies, experts, professional organisations, regulatory agencies and health practitioners), and the influencing research standards. The potentially influenced research steps either precede the research (i.e. the prioritisation of research question), relate to it directly (i.e. its planning, conduct, reporting, dissemination and evaluation), or build on it (i.e. regulatory approval, integration into guidelines and adoption into practice). In conclusion, the industry has successfully fostered relationships with almost every actor of the health research enterprise and is using these relationships to influence the different steps of health research. The degree of influence the industry is having on health research calls for more work on managing the relationships discussed herein.

We Need to Talk About Corruption in Health Systems

The health sector consistently appears prominently in surveys of perceived corruption, with considerable evidence that this has serious adverse consequences for patients. Yet this issue is far from prominent in the international health policy discourse. We identify five reasons why the health policy community has been reluctant to talk about it. These are the problem of defining corruption, the fact that some corrupt practices are actually ways of making dysfunctional systems work, the serious challenges to researching corruption, concerns that a focus on corruption is a form of victim blaming that ignores larger issues, and a lack of evidence about what works to tackle it. We propose three things that can be done to address this situation. First, seek consensus on the scale and nature of corruption. Second, decide on priorities, taking account the importance of the particular problem and the feasibility of doing something about it. Third, take a holistic view, drawing on a wide range of disciplines.