Psychiatrists

Psych journal discloses financial ties to industry

Thu, 04 Sep 2008 05:28:13 -0400

The editor in chief of Psychiatric Times, a leading psychiatric journal, has stepped forward to say the journal will disclose conflicts of interest that may exist within its editorial board to "help ensure fair and accurate reporting, as well as balanced and scientifically grounded opinion and commentary." Some board members have ties to universities and drugmakers. The Integrity in Science Watch program and The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors also weigh in on the disclosure topic.

There has been a lot of hand-wringing over inappropriate industry influence on psychiatrists, as psychiatry and pharma often work closely on clinical trials and drug education. Critics say docs need to disclose and cut down on these ties, while others say partnerships with drugmakers benefit patients, as long as researchers follow their institutions' conflict of interest rules. Few would argue, however, that it's become increasingly important to disclose what ties do exist--and many would recommend going above and beyond minimum conflict of interest rules to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. After all, once someone accuses you of, in essence, using children as guinea pigs to test a psych drug, your credibility is more than shot.

To learn more about this topic:
- read the Pharmalot report

Study: Academic medical centers have easier time with conflict-of-interest policies

Anne Zieger — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:53:03 -0400

Sometimes, when a healthcare institution rolls out a conflict of interest policy, it creates a hue and cry from various parties who feel that patients or staff members will be unfairly burdened in some manner. However, it seems that even when they adopt strict conflict-of-interest policies, academic medical centers see little loss of faculty members and staff in response, according to a new study appearing in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The study, which notes that roughly 25 medical centers have instituted bans on gifts and other inducements from drug and medical-device companies, also notes that the bans created little turnover.

Such policies typically ban acceptance of travel reimbursement and food, disallow ghostwriting of articles and phony consulting contracts and limit drug sample distribution. In some cases, limits on sample distribution has raised objections from those who say that the poor can't get drugs if samples aren't available, but most of these strictures haven't caused much conflict, the authors noted.

To learn more about this study:
- read this Modern Healthcare article

Related Articles:
UPMC plans rollout of drugmaker relationship limits
Harvard psychiatrists fail to reveal millions in pharma pay
Cardiac surgeon faces conflict-of-interest challenge
Henry Ford bans pharma perks, vendor drop-ins

New delusions for a modern age

Anne Zieger — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 13:12:18 -0400

There have always been psychotics--people who are out of touch with reality--and there always will be. Of late, however, psychotic visions are starting to take on themes more in tune with the times, psychiatrists say. These include the "Truman Show" delusion, in which people believe that their every move is being filmed for a reality TV show starring them. There's "Internet delusions," in which people believe that they're being tracked everywhere they go by web-savvy folks with high technology at their disposal. Or maybe you have "climate change delusions," in which you refuse to fill a glass of water because you believe you'll be drinking the world's last fresh drink. Article

Psychiatric group's drugmaker ties questioned

Anne Zieger — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 11:35:50 -0400

Under attack from Congress, particularly Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), the psychiatric field's leading professional organization is being forced to explain its tight financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry. The American Psychiatric Association, which got a blistering letter from Grassley questioning its funding sources, will hold a private meeting this weekend to discuss how to deal with public questions over its pharma relationships.

Without question, pharmaceutical funding does make up a significant part of the APA's budget. In 2006, for example--the latest year for which figures are available--drugmakers contributed 30 percent of the group's $62.5 million in financing. Pharmaceutical companies also have strong ties with individual doctors influential within the APA. For example, the group's president-elect, Dr. Alan Schatzberg of Stanford, has $4.8 million in stock holdings in a drug development company.

Meanwhile, data suggests that cushy drugmaker deals with psychiatrists are common. While on industry consulting deals data is hard to come by, Vermont officials recently concluded that in the 2007 fiscal year, psychiatrists got more money from pharmaceutical companies than doctors in any other specialty.

To learn more about this controversy:
- read this piece from The New York Times

Related Articles:
Harvard psychiatrists fail to reveal millions in pharma pay
Psychiatrists getting the largest pharma gifts
Arms twisted, pharma promises disclosure
Docs go cold turkey on industry pay

Harvard psychiatrists fail to reveal millions in pharma pay

Mon, 09 Jun 2008 06:59:57 -0400

A Harvard child psychiatrist with a global reputation whose work has helped to promote the use of antipsychotic meds in children apparently didn't report most of the $1.6 million in drug maker consulting fees he earned over the last several years.

According to information given to Congressional investigators, Dr. Joseph Biederman failed to report much of this consulting income to university officials, which he took in between 2000 and 2007. According to Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), this may have violated federal and university research rules that attempt to limit potential conflicts of interest. Also accused of such conflicts are Dr. Timothy Wilens, who took in $1.6 million from 2000 to 2007, and Dr.Thomas Spencer, who reported earning at least $1 million during that period.

Even these large numbers may understate the case, given that the researchers' alleged incomes sometimes conflict with drug company reports, some of which contend that they give the researchers far more money than was disclosed. Given these questions, the $287 million in federal grants won by Drs. Biederman and Wilens in 2005 may be restricted, or even suspended.

To get more background on this controversy:
- read this article from The New York Times

Related Articles:
Psychiatrists getting the largest pharma gifts
Cardiac surgeon faces conflict-of-interest challenge
Feds charge research over Pfizer consulting fees
Senate questions NIH conflict-of-interest punishment

SPOTLIGHT: HHS, DoD send mental health workers for PTSD treatment

Thu, 05 Jun 2008 06:59:52 -0400

Admitting (critics say rather belatedly) to the reality that many soldiers are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, the Department of Defense and HHS have announced a program under which they'll send 200 psychiatrists, social workers and other mental healthcare pros to military facilities to treat such patients. HHS will coordinate scientific research on the mental health care needs of soldiers. Article

Bill would make pharmas, device makers disclose gifts

Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:59:58 -0400

A measure that would force pharmaceutical companies and medical device makers to disclose gifts valued at more than $25 seems to be gathering momentum. Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and Pete Stark (D-CA) have introduced a bill that would set such a rule. It follows a companion bill sponsored by Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Herb Kohl (D-WI), which in its case, would require companies with at least $100 million in annual revenue to disclose gifts of more than $25, which then would be posted on a website. In the Senate version, companies would also have to disclose payments for continuing medical education.

With sponsors from both sides of Congress, and terms that seem relatively complementary, it looks like this measure has decent prospects. Let's see if PhRMA can pry both the House and the Senate off of this one.

To learn more about these measures:
- read this Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report piece

Related Articles:
Psychiatrists getting largest pharma gifts. Report
NY bill would require pharmas to report MD gifts. Report
Doctors weigh in on pros and cons of accepting drug/device freebies. Letters
States tighten screws on pharma marketers. Report

ALSO NOTED: Hospitals offer more charity care; Senate approves health IT fund; and much more...

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:59:50 -0400

> Non-profits have begun offering charity to more patients in an effort to impress the IRS. FierceHealthFinance

> The U.S. Senate has approved a special health IT fund which will be used to fund future bills requiring HIT funding. FierceHealthIT

> A new group of malaria vaccine trials will pay volunteers to get infected. FierceBioResearcher

> Critics are now raising questions as to whether the FDA is doing a good enough job of disciplining researchers who break drug-trial rules. FiercePharma

And Finally... A new blood test could finally help psychiatrists determine, concretely, whether antidepressant drugs are working. Article