Mark W Camp1, Allan E Gross1, Martin F McKneally1. 1. From the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, (Camp, Gross, McKneally); the Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, (McKneally); the Hospital for Sick Children (Camp); and Mount Sinai Hospital, (Gross) Toronto, Ont.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, revelations of inappropriate financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers have challenged the presumption that surgeons can collaborate with surgical device manufacturers without damaging public trust in the surgical profession. We explored postoperative Canadian patients' knowledge and opinions about financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers. METHODS: This complex issue was explored using qualitative methods. We conducted semistructured face-to-face interviews with postoperative patients in follow-up arthroplasty clinics at an academic hospital in Toronto, Canada. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analyzed. Patient-derived concepts and themes were uncovered. RESULTS: We interviewed 33 patients. Five major themes emerged: 1) many patients are unaware of the existence of financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers; 2) patients approve of financial relationships that support innovation and research but are opposed to relationships that involve financial incentives that benefit only the surgeon and the manufacturer; 3) patients do not support disclosure of financial relationships during the consent process as it may shift focus away from the more important risks; 4) patients support oversight at the professional level but reject the idea of government involvement in oversight; and 5) patients entrust their surgeons to make appropriate patient-centred choices. CONCLUSION: This qualitative study deepens our understanding of financial relationships between surgeons and industry. Patients support relationships with industry that provide potential benefit to current or future patients. They trust our ability to self-regulate. Disclosure combined with appropriate oversight will strengthen public trust in professional collaboration with industry.
BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, revelations of inappropriate financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers have challenged the presumption that surgeons can collaborate with surgical device manufacturers without damaging public trust in the surgical profession. We explored postoperative Canadian patients' knowledge and opinions about financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers. METHODS: This complex issue was explored using qualitative methods. We conducted semistructured face-to-face interviews with postoperative patients in follow-up arthroplasty clinics at an academic hospital in Toronto, Canada. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analyzed. Patient-derived concepts and themes were uncovered. RESULTS: We interviewed 33 patients. Five major themes emerged: 1) many patients are unaware of the existence of financial relationships between surgeons and surgical device manufacturers; 2) patients approve of financial relationships that support innovation and research but are opposed to relationships that involve financial incentives that benefit only the surgeon and the manufacturer; 3) patients do not support disclosure of financial relationships during the consent process as it may shift focus away from the more important risks; 4) patients support oversight at the professional level but reject the idea of government involvement in oversight; and 5) patients entrust their surgeons to make appropriate patient-centred choices. CONCLUSION: This qualitative study deepens our understanding of financial relationships between surgeons and industry. Patients support relationships with industry that provide potential benefit to current or future patients. They trust our ability to self-regulate. Disclosure combined with appropriate oversight will strengthen public trust in professional collaboration with industry.
Authors: Lindsay A Hampson; Manish Agrawal; Steven Joffe; Cary P Gross; Joel Verter; Ezekiel J Emanuel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-11-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mustafa H Khan; Joon Y Lee; Jeffrey A Rihn; Ezequiel H Cassinelli; Moe R Lim; James D Kang; William F Donaldson Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Rowland W Pettit; Jordan Kaplan; Matthew M Delancy; Edward Reece; Sebastian Winocour; Anaeze C Offodile; Anand Kumar; Carrie K Chu Journal: Aesthet Surg J Date: 2022-01-12 Impact factor: 4.485
Authors: Anna R Gagliardi; Pascale Lehoux; Ariel Ducey; Anthony Easty; Sue Ross; Chaim Bell; Patricia Trbovich; David R Urbach Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-03-30 Impact factor: 3.240