Literature DB >> 21872112

New paradigms for physician-industry relations: overview and application for SVS members.

Niten Singh1, Ruth Bush, Michael Dalsing, Cynthia K Shortell.   

Abstract

Relationships between physicians and their industry partners have ranged from spectacular collaborations that produce extraordinary advances in patient care, such as endovascular aneurysm repair, to humiliating scandals such as extravagant trips and bogus "consulting" agreements resulting in legal actions. It is the latter which have led many to call for the end of all physician-industry relationships, and the former which mandate their preservation. While these two examples are representative of extremes at each end of the spectrum of this issue, in reality the majority of physician-industry relationships are far more complex, and the line between appropriate and inappropriate, and ethical and unethical, is hard to draw. The benefits of our relationships with industry are many: partnering to develop new therapies and technologies, educating and training physicians around new therapies and technologies, support of continuing medical education (CME), fellowship training, and patient education. The pitfall and danger of this relationship is that support from industry, be it a meal, a pen, an educational grant, or flattery, may unduly and inappropriately influence physician decision making around a specific company's product. While it is clear that free trips are not within the realm of proper interaction, what about unrestricted educational grants to institutions, or support of CME activities, professional society meetings, and new device training? As a result of the intense scrutiny of relationships between physicians and industry recently, multiple diverse entities (Association of American Medical Colleges, American Medical Association, Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education, professional medical associations, academic medical centers, industry, and government) have generated guidelines and policies with very different perspectives, reflective of their different missions. These policies range from vague and lenient, with only basic limitation of the physician-industry relationship, to extremely rigid and strict, with only minimal interaction and mission support permitted. Given the many changes in oversight and expectations for the relationship between physicians and industry, it is important for vascular surgeons to be aware of the background behind these modifications, the evidence that they are needed, and the positions of the diverse organizations and institutions that have already defined their policies on this issue.
Copyright © 2011 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21872112     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.06.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  3 in total

1.  The Effect of Product Safety Courses on the Adoption and Outcomes of LESS Surgery.

Authors:  Paul G Toomey; Sharona B Ross; Edward Choung; Natalie Donn; Michelle Vice; Kenneth Luberice; Michael Albrink; Alexander S Rosemurgy
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2015 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

2.  Level of Evidence and Industry Sponsorship Associated with Favorable Outcomes in Publications on Platelet-Rich-Plasma Therapy in Musculoskeletal Disorders.

Authors:  Pietro Felice Tomazini Nesello; Allan Cassio Baroni; Luciano da Silva Selistre
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2019-12-19

3.  Association between industry payments and prescribing costly medications: an observational study using open payments and medicare part D data.

Authors:  Manvi Sharma; Aisha Vadhariya; Michael L Johnson; Zachary A Marcum; Holly M Holmes
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-04-02       Impact factor: 2.655

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.