Industry Payments Among Editorial Board Members of Orthopaedic Journals: An Open Payments Analysis From 2014 to 2019

Health Care Industry Payments to Editorial Board Members of Major Neurosurgery Journals Between 2017 and 2022

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Financial conflicts of interest between editorial board members and industry could lead to biases and impartial editorial decisions. We aimed to evaluate the frequency, amount, and characteristics of payments to editorial board members of neurosurgery journals over a 6-year period.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, editorial board members were derived from the top 10 neurosurgery journals based on Google Scholar metrics. The Open Payments database by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was accessed to evaluate industry payments to editorial board members from 2017to 2022. Descriptive analyses were performed on payment data, adjusted for inflation using the consumer price indices.

RESULTS

We included 805 editorial board members. After excluding duplicate names, 342 (53.9%) of 634 had received payments between 2017 and 2022. Eight of 10 journals had more than 50% of editorial board members listed in the Open Payments database. Between 2017 and 2022, the total number of payments to editorial board members was $143 732 057, encompassing $1 323 936 in research payments, $69 122 067 in associated research funding, $5 380 926 in ownership and investment interests, and $67 905 128 in general payments. General payments decreased from $13 676 382 in 2017 to $8 528 003 in 2022. Royalties ($43 393 697) and consulting ($13 157 934) contributed the most to general payments between 2017 and 2022. Four journals had a percentage increase in total payments, whereas general payments decreased for 6 journals.

CONCLUSION

Around 54% of editorial board members of neurosurgical journals received industry payments between 2017 and 2022. We identified journal-specific trends in industry payments and highlighted the importance of transparency and disclosure of financial conflicts of interests for neurosurgery journals.

Costs and Outcomes of Total Joint Arthroplasty in Medicare Beneficiaries Are Not Meaningfully Associated with Industry Payments

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have demonstrated that industry payments affect physician prescribing patterns, but their effect on orthopaedic surgical costs is unknown. This study examines the relationship between industry payments and the total costs of primary total joint arthroplasty, as well as operating room cost, length of stay, 30-day mortality, and 30-day readmission.

METHODS

Open Payments data were matched across a 20% sample of Medicare-insured patients undergoing primary elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) (n = 130,872) performed by 7,539 surgeons or primary elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA) (n = 230,856) performed by 8,977 surgeons from 2013 to 2015. Patient, hospital, and surgeon-specific factors were gathered. Total and operating room costs, length of stay, mortality, and readmissions were recorded. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were used to identify the risk-adjusted relationships between industry payments and the primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

In this study, 96.7% of THA surgeons and 97.4% of TKA surgeons received industry payments. After multivariable risk adjustment, for each $1,000 increase in industry payments, the total costs of THA increased by $0.50 (0.003% of total costs) and the operating room costs of THA increased by $0.20 (0.003% of total costs). Industry payments were not associated with TKA cost. Industry payments were not associated with 30-day mortality after either THA or TKA. Higher industry payments were independently associated with a marginal decrease in the length of stay for patients undergoing THA (0.0045 days per $1,000) or TKA (0.0035 days per $1,000) and a <0.1% increase in the odds of 30-day readmission after THA for every $1,000 in industry payments. The median total THA costs were $300 higher (p < 0.001), whereas the median TKA costs were $150 lower (p < 0.001), for surgeons receiving the highest 5% of industry payments. These surgical procedures were more often performed in large urban areas, in hospitals with a higher number of beds, with a higher wage index, and by more experienced surgeons and were associated with a 0.4 to 1-day shorter length of stay (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although most arthroplasty surgeons received industry payments, a minority of surgeons received the majority of payments. Overall, arthroplasty costs and outcomes were not meaningfully impacted by industry relationships.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Open Payments Data Analysis of General and Fellowship-trained Surgeons Receiving Industry General Payments From 2016 to 2020: Payment Disparities and COVID-19 Pandemic Impact

OBJECTIVE

To characterize industry nonresearch payments made to general and fellowship-trained surgeons between 2016 and 2020.

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments Data (OPD) reports industry payments made to physicians related to drugs and medical devices. General payments are those not associated with research.

METHODS

OPD data were queried for general and fellowship-trained surgeons who received general payments from 2016 to 2020. Payments' nature, amount, company, covered product, and location were collected. Surgeons' demographics, subspecialty, and leadership roles in hospitals, societies, and editorial boards were evaluated.

RESULTS

From 2016 to 2020, 44,700 general and fellowship-trained surgeons were paid $535,425,543 in 1,440,850 general payments. The median payment was $29.18. The most frequent payments were for food and beverage (76.6%) and travel and lodging (15.6%); however, the highest dollar payments were for consulting fees ($93,128,401; 17.4%), education ($88,404,531; 16.5%), royalty or license ($87,471,238; 16.3%), and travel and lodging ($66,333,149; 12.4%). Five companies made half of all payments ($265,654,522; 49.6%): Intuitive Surgical ($128,517,411; 24%), Boston Scientific ($48,094,570; 9%), Edwards Lifesciences ($41,835,544, 7.8%), Medtronic Vascular ($33,607,136; 6.3%), and W. L. Gore & Associates ($16,626,371; 3.1%). Medical devices comprised 74.7% of payments ($399,897,217), followed by drugs and biologicals ($33,945,300; 6.3%). Texas, California, Florida, New York, and Pennsylvania received the most payments; however, the top dollar payments were in California ($65,702,579; 12.3%), Michigan ($52,990,904, 9.9%), Texas ($39,362,131; 7.4%), Maryland ($37,611,959; 7%), and Florida ($33,417,093, 6.2%). General surgery received the highest total payments ($245,031,174; 45.8%), followed by thoracic surgery ($167,806,514; 31.3%) and vascular surgery ($60,781,266; 11.4%). A total of 10,361 surgeons were paid >$5000, of which 1614 were women (15.6%); in this group, men received higher payments than women (means, $53,446 vs $22,571; P <0.001) and thoracic surgeons received highest payments (mean, $76,381; NS, P =0.14). A total of 120 surgeons were paid >$500,000 ($203,011,672; 38%)-5 non-Hispanic White (NHW) women (4.2%) and 82 NHW (68.3%), 24 Asian (20%), 7 Hispanic (5.8%), and 2 Black (1.7%) men; in this group, men received higher payments than women (means, $1,735,570 vs $684,224), and NHW men received payments double those of other men (means, $2,049,554 vs $955,368; NS, P =0.087). Among these 120 highly paid surgeons (>$500,000), 55 held hospital and departmental leadership roles, 30 were leaders in surgical societies, 27 authored clinical guidelines, and 16 served on journal editorial boards. During COVID-19, 2020 experienced half the number of payments than the preceding 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

General and fellowship-trained surgeons received substantial industry nonresearch payments. The highest-paid recipients were men. Further work is warranted in assessing how race, gender, and leadership roles influence the nature of industry payments and surgical practice. A significant decline in payments was observed early during the COVID-19 pandemic.