BACKGROUND: Interactions between the pharmaceutical industry and physicians have been discussed in numerous publications; however, most articles are limited to surveys and self-report data and often focus on academic or training contexts. We describe the role of pharmaceutical representatives and the use of samples in community-based family practices, using data obtained by directly observing clinical encounters. METHODS: We collected detailed descriptive field notes of the direct observations of 53 primary care clinicians and 1588 patient encounters in 18 purposefully selected Nebraska family practices. We used a comparative case study design, that used depth interviews of clinicians and office staff, and included details of the interactions with pharmaceutical representatives and the use of samples in clinical encounters. RESULTS: Individual providers and practices displayed noticeable variation in their approaches to drug representatives and samples. We found formal strategies and policies in a minority of practices. Generally there was little structure in the organization and distribution of sample medications at the office level, and detailed patient education regarding these drugs was rarely observed in patient encounters. Nevertheless, samples were used in almost 20% of observed encounters, at times as starter dosages, but often as complete courses of treatment. The benefits derived from contact with the pharmaceutical industry varied substantially, but most often included free medication samples, meals, and patient education materials. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians have a complex symbiosis with the pharmaceutical industry and need to critically evaluate their handling of samples and their contact with pharmaceutical representatives to optimize this relationship and ensure quality patient care. Clinics with specific policies for interactions with drug companies appear to derive more satisfaction from their encounters.
BACKGROUND: Interactions between the pharmaceutical industry and physicians have been discussed in numerous publications; however, most articles are limited to surveys and self-report data and often focus on academic or training contexts. We describe the role of pharmaceutical representatives and the use of samples in community-based family practices, using data obtained by directly observing clinical encounters. METHODS: We collected detailed descriptive field notes of the direct observations of 53 primary care clinicians and 1588 patient encounters in 18 purposefully selected Nebraska family practices. We used a comparative case study design, that used depth interviews of clinicians and office staff, and included details of the interactions with pharmaceutical representatives and the use of samples in clinical encounters. RESULTS: Individual providers and practices displayed noticeable variation in their approaches to drug representatives and samples. We found formal strategies and policies in a minority of practices. Generally there was little structure in the organization and distribution of sample medications at the office level, and detailed patient education regarding these drugs was rarely observed in patient encounters. Nevertheless, samples were used in almost 20% of observed encounters, at times as starter dosages, but often as complete courses of treatment. The benefits derived from contact with the pharmaceutical industry varied substantially, but most often included free medication samples, meals, and patient education materials. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians have a complex symbiosis with the pharmaceutical industry and need to critically evaluate their handling of samples and their contact with pharmaceutical representatives to optimize this relationship and ensure quality patient care. Clinics with specific policies for interactions with drug companies appear to derive more satisfaction from their encounters.
Authors: Sarah L Cutrona; Steffie Woolhandler; Karen E Lasser; David H Bor; David U Himmelstein; William H Shrank; Neal S LeLeiko Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Sarah L Cutrona; Steffie Woolhandler; Karen E Lasser; David H Bor; Danny McCormick; David U Himmelstein Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2008-01-02 Impact factor: 9.308