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

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