BACKGROUND: Many general practitioners receive visits at their surgery from pharmaceutical representatives. The purpose of this study was to describe these visits, their framework and content (especially discussions of safety information), and to compare the findings with a corresponding study conducted in 2001–02. BACKGROUND: A total of 116 fifth-year medical students (2001–02: 144) at the University of Oslo in practical training at GP surgeries in the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority in the period 2014–16 completed an electronic questionnaire after attending a visit by a pharmaceutical representative at the medical centre. RESULTS: A total of 116 visits took place during lunch breaks, when the representative paid for the food. In 90 % (2001–02: 81 %) of the visits, both doctors and their colleagues attended. Free samples were given out in 28 % (2001–02: 41 %) of the meetings, and small gifts in 5 % (2001–02: 44 %). Although the representative often refrained from raising the topic of safety information about the medication, this nevertheless happened less often than in 2001–02: adverse effects (42 % vs 55 %; p=0.04), interactions (53 % vs 64 %; p=0.07), contraindications (37 % vs 61 %; p= 0.0002) and precautions (30 % vs 56 %; p<0.0001). The medical students gave a below average score for their own learning outcome from the presentations (4.8 on a scale from 0–10) (2001–02: 4.2). INTERPRETATION: Although the study shows improvements since 2001–02, it is still common for information provided at visits by pharmaceutical representatives to be deficient with regard to discussion of adverse effects, interactions, contraindications and precautions. Doctors must base their judgement on independent sources of information in order to stay abreast of the latest safety data on the medications.
BACKGROUND: Many general practitioners receive visits at their surgery from pharmaceutical representatives. The purpose of this study was to describe these visits, their framework and content (especially discussions of safety information), and to compare the findings with a corresponding study conducted in 2001–02. BACKGROUND: A total of 116 fifth-year medical students (2001–02: 144) at the University of Oslo in practical training at GP surgeries in the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority in the period 2014–16 completed an electronic questionnaire after attending a visit by a pharmaceutical representative at the medical centre. RESULTS: A total of 116 visits took place during lunch breaks, when the representative paid for the food. In 90 % (2001–02: 81 %) of the visits, both doctors and their colleagues attended. Free samples were given out in 28 % (2001–02: 41 %) of the meetings, and small gifts in 5 % (2001–02: 44 %). Although the representative often refrained from raising the topic of safety information about the medication, this nevertheless happened less often than in 2001–02: adverse effects (42 % vs 55 %; p=0.04), interactions (53 % vs 64 %; p=0.07), contraindications (37 % vs 61 %; p= 0.0002) and precautions (30 % vs 56 %; p<0.0001). The medical students gave a below average score for their own learning outcome from the presentations (4.8 on a scale from 0–10) (2001–02: 4.2). INTERPRETATION: Although the study shows improvements since 2001–02, it is still common for information provided at visits by pharmaceutical representatives to be deficient with regard to discussion of adverse effects, interactions, contraindications and precautions. Doctors must base their judgement on independent sources of information in order to stay abreast of the latest safety data on the medications.