Interactions between Non-Physician Clinicians and Industry: A Systematic Review
Background:
With increasing restrictions placed on physician–industry interactions, industry marketing may target other health professionals. Recent health policy developments confer even greater importance on the decision making of non-physician clinicians. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine the types and implications of non-physician clinician–industry interactions in clinical practice.
Methods and Findings:
We searched MEDLINE and Web of Science from January 1, 1946, through June 24, 2013, according to PRISMA guidelines. Non-physician clinicians eligible for inclusion were: Registered Nurses, nurse prescribers, Physician Assistants, pharmacists, dieticians, and physical or occupational therapists; trainee samples were excluded. Fifteen studies met inclusion criteria. Data were synthesized qualitatively into eight outcome domains: nature and frequency of industry interactions; attitudes toward industry; perceived ethical acceptability of interactions; perceived marketing influence; perceived reliability of industry information; preparation for industry interactions; reactions to industry relations policy; and management of industry interactions. Non-physician clinicians reported interacting with the pharmaceutical and infant formula industries. Clinicians across disciplines met with pharmaceutical representatives regularly and relied on them for practice information. Clinicians frequently received industry “information,” attended sponsored “education,” and acted as distributors for similar materials targeted at patients. Clinicians generally regarded this as an ethical use of industry resources, and felt they could detect “promotion” while benefiting from industry “information.” Free samples were among the most approved and common ways that clinicians interacted with industry. Included studies were observational and of varying methodological rigor; thus, these findings may not be generalizable. This review is, however, the first to our knowledge to provide a descriptive analysis of this literature.
Conclusions:
Non-physician clinicians' generally positive attitudes toward industry interactions, despite their recognition of issues related to bias, suggest that industry interactions are normalized in clinical practice across non-physician disciplines. Industry relations policy should address all disciplines and be implemented consistently in order to mitigate conflicts of interest and address such interactions' potential to affect patient care.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Vyšlo v časopise:
Interactions between Non-Physician Clinicians and Industry: A Systematic Review. PLoS Med 10(11): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001561
Kategorie:
Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001561
Souhrn
Background:
With increasing restrictions placed on physician–industry interactions, industry marketing may target other health professionals. Recent health policy developments confer even greater importance on the decision making of non-physician clinicians. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine the types and implications of non-physician clinician–industry interactions in clinical practice.
Methods and Findings:
We searched MEDLINE and Web of Science from January 1, 1946, through June 24, 2013, according to PRISMA guidelines. Non-physician clinicians eligible for inclusion were: Registered Nurses, nurse prescribers, Physician Assistants, pharmacists, dieticians, and physical or occupational therapists; trainee samples were excluded. Fifteen studies met inclusion criteria. Data were synthesized qualitatively into eight outcome domains: nature and frequency of industry interactions; attitudes toward industry; perceived ethical acceptability of interactions; perceived marketing influence; perceived reliability of industry information; preparation for industry interactions; reactions to industry relations policy; and management of industry interactions. Non-physician clinicians reported interacting with the pharmaceutical and infant formula industries. Clinicians across disciplines met with pharmaceutical representatives regularly and relied on them for practice information. Clinicians frequently received industry “information,” attended sponsored “education,” and acted as distributors for similar materials targeted at patients. Clinicians generally regarded this as an ethical use of industry resources, and felt they could detect “promotion” while benefiting from industry “information.” Free samples were among the most approved and common ways that clinicians interacted with industry. Included studies were observational and of varying methodological rigor; thus, these findings may not be generalizable. This review is, however, the first to our knowledge to provide a descriptive analysis of this literature.
Conclusions:
Non-physician clinicians' generally positive attitudes toward industry interactions, despite their recognition of issues related to bias, suggest that industry interactions are normalized in clinical practice across non-physician disciplines. Industry relations policy should address all disciplines and be implemented consistently in order to mitigate conflicts of interest and address such interactions' potential to affect patient care.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Zdroje
1. SchroederC (2003) The tyranny of profit: concentration of wealth, corporate globalization, and the failed US health care system. ANS Adv Nurs Sci 26: 173–184.
2. Pew Prescription Project (2009) Addressing cost and quality: the Physician Payments Sunshine Act. Boston: Pew Foundation.
3. Angell M (2005) The truth about the drug companies: how they deceive us and what to do about it. New York: Random House.
4. ClarkeAE, MamoL, FishmanJR, ShimJK, FosketJR (2003) Biomedicalization: technoscientific transformations of health, illness, and U.S. biomedicine. Am Sociol Rev 68: 161–194.
5. MaloneRE (2003) Distal nursing. Soc Sci Med 56: 2317–2326.
6. AustinWJ (2011) The incommensurability of nursing as a practice and the customer service model: an evolutionary threat to the discipline. Nurs Philos 12: 158–166.
7. JutelA, MenkesDB (2008) Soft targets: nurses and the pharmaceutical industry. PLoS Med 5: e5 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050005
8. CriggerNJ (2009) Towards understanding the nature of conflict of interest and its application to the discipline of nursing. Nurs Philos 10: 253–262.
9. SpringerRA (2011) Pharmaceutical industry discursives and the marketization of nursing work: a case example. Nurs Philos 12: 214–228 doi:10.1111/j.1466-769X.2011.00498.x
10. CrockE (2009) Ethics of pharmaceutical company relationships with the nursing profession: No free lunch….and no more pens? Contemp Nurse 33: 202–209.
11. AdamsPJ (2007) Assessing whether to receive funding support from tobacco, alcohol, gambling, and other dangerous consumption industries. Addiction 102: 1027–1033.
12. Wiist WH (2010) The bottom line or public health. New York: Oxford University Press.
13. BrezisM, WiistWH (2011) Vulnerability of health to market forces. Med Care 49: 232–239 doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e31820ab638
14. FreudenbergN (2005) Public health advocacy to change corporate practices: Implications for health education practice and research. Health Educ Behav 32: 298–319.
15. HastingsG (2012) Why corporate power is a public health priority. BMJ 345: e5124 doi:10.1136/bmj.e5124
16. (2009) Physician Payments Sunshine Act of 2009. US 111th Congress, section 301.
17. CriggerNJ (2005) Pharmaceutical promotions and conflict of interest in nurse practitioner's decision making: the undiscovered country. J Am Acad Nurse Pract 17: 207–212.
18. AuerbachDI (2012) Will the NP workforce grow in the future? New forecasts and implications for healthcare delivery. Med Care 50: 606–610.
19. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2011) Nurse practitioners, certified nurse midwives, and physician assistants in physician offices, 69th edition. Atlanta (Georgia): US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
20. SmithM, BatesDW, BodenheimerT, ClearyPD (2010) Why pharmacists belong in the medical home. Health Aff (Millwood) 29: 906–913 doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0209
21. JutelA, MenkesDB (2010) Nurses' reported influence on the prescription and use of medication. Int Nurs Rev 57: 92–97 doi:10.1111/j.1466-7657.2009.00749.x
22. Higgins J, Green S, editors(2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, 5th edition. The Cochrane Collaboration. Available: http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed 24 October 2013.
23. Dixon-WoodsM, ShawRL, AgarwalS, SmithJA (2004) The problem of appraising qualitative research. Qual Saf Health Care 13: 223–225.
24. MoherD, LiberatiA, TetzlaffJ, AltmanDG (2009) The PRISMA Group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6: e1000097 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097
25. LaddEC, MahoneyDF, EmaniS (2010) “Under the radar”: nurse practitioner prescribers and pharmaceutical industry promotions. Am J Manag Care 16: e358–e362.
26. FischerMA, KeoughME, BarilJL, SaccoccioL, MazorKM, et al. (2009) Prescribers and pharmaceutical representatives: why are we still meeting? J Gen Intern Med 24: 795–801 doi:10.1007/s11606-009-0989-6
27. JutelA, MenkesDB (2009) “But doctors do it…”: nurses' views of gifts and information from the pharmaceutical industry. Ann Pharmacother 43: 1057–1063 doi:10.1345/aph.1M027
28. DemerittGA (1966) The effectiveness of pharmaceutical promotion to hospital pharmacists. Am J Hosp Pharm 23: 13–23.
29. McInnesRJ, WrightC, HaqS, McGranachanM (2007) Who's keeping the code? Compliance with the international code for the marketing of breast-milk substitutes in greater Glasgow. Public Health Nutr 10: 719–725 doi:10.1017/s1368980007441453
30. BackerEL, LebsackJA, Van TonderRJ, CrabtreeBF (2000) The value of pharmaceutical representative visits and medication samples in community-based family practices. J Fam Pract 49: 811–816.
31. HallJ, NoyceP, CantrillJ (2009) How do district nurses choose which products to prescribe? Br J Community Nurs 14: 12,14–17.
32. HallJ, CantrillJ, NoyceP (2003) Professional issues. The information sources used by community nurse prescribers. Br J Nurs 12: 810–818.
33. NolanP, CarrN, DoranM (2004) Nurse prescribing: the experiences of psychiatric nurses in the United States. Nurs Stand 18: 33–38.
34. CriggerN, BarnesK, JunkoA, RahalS, SheekC (2009) Nurse practitioners' perceptions and participation in pharmaceutical marketing. J Adv Nurs 65: 525–533 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04911.x
35. ClausonKA, KhanfarNM, PolenHH, GibsonF (2009) Nurse prescribers' interactions with and perceptions of pharmaceutical sales representatives. J Clin Nurs 18: 228–233 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2008.02536.x
36. AguayoVM, RossJS, KanonS, OuedraogoAN (2003) Monitoring compliance with the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in west Africa: multisite cross sectional survey in Togo and Burkina Faso. BMJ 326: 127.
37. World Health Organization (1981) International code of marketing of breast-milk substitutes. Geneva: World Health Organization.
38. PhilippBL, FrankDA, HumphreysRJ, Jean-MarieS (2007) Distribution of industry-sponsored diaper bags from maternity facilities in Massachusetts. Breastfeed Med 2: 255–260.
39. PinckneyRG, HelminskiAS, KennedyAG, MacleanCD, HurowitzL, et al. (2011) The effect of medication samples on self-reported prescribing practices: a statewide, cross-sectional survey. J Gen Intern Med 26: 40–44 doi:10.1007/s11606-010-1483-x
40. Farthing-PapineauEC, PeakAS (2005) Pharmacists' perceptions of the pharmaceutical industry. Am J Health Syst Pharm 62: 2401–2409 doi:10.2146/ajhp050073
41. MahoneyDF, LaddE (2010) More than a prescriber: gerontological nurse practitioners' perspectives on prescribing and pharmaceutical marketing. Geriatr Nurs 31: 17–27 doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2009.09.003
42. Dumit J (2012) Drugs for life: how pharmaceutical companies define our health. Durham (North Carolina): Duke University Press.
43. ApplbaumK (2009) ‘Consumers are patients!’ Shared decision-making and treatment non-compliance as business opportunity. Transcult Psychiatry 46: 107–130.
44. CampbellEG, RaoSR, DesRochesCM, IezzoniLI, VogeliC, et al. (2010) Physician professionalism and changes in physician-industry relationships from 2004 to 2009. Arch Intern Med 170: 1820–1826 doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2010.383
45. WazanaA (2000) Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: is a gift ever just a gift? JAMA 283: 373–380.
46. CaamanoF, FigueirasA, Gestal-OteroJJ (2002) Influence of commercial information on prescription quantity in primary care. Eur J Public Health 12: 187–191.
47. WilsonNA, SchnellerES, MontgomeryK, BozicKJ (2008) Hip and knee implants: current trends and policy considerations. Health Aff (Millwood) 27: 1587–1598 doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.6.1587
48. GlaserB, BeroL (2005) Attitudes of academic and clinical researchers toward financial ties in research: a systematic review. Sci Eng Ethics 11: 553–573 doi:10.1007/s11948-005-0026-z
49. AtkinsS, LewinS, SmithH, EngelM, FretheimA, et al. (2008) Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: lessons learnt. BMC Med Res Methodol 8: 21.
50. DanaJ, LoewensteinG (2003) A social science perspective on gifts to physicians from industry. JAMA 290: 252–255 doi:10.1001/jama.290.2.252
51. DoranE, KerridgeI, McNeillP, HenryD (2006) Empirical uncertainty and moral contest: a qualitative analysis of the relationship between medical specialists and the pharmaceutical industry in Australia. Soc Sci Med 62: 1510–1519 doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.07.037
Štítky
Interné lekárstvoČlánok vyšiel v časopise
PLOS Medicine
2013 Číslo 11
- Statinová intolerance
- Očkování proti virové hemoragické horečce Ebola experimentální vakcínou rVSVDG-ZEBOV-GP
- Co dělat při intoleranci statinů?
- Pleiotropní účinky statinů na kardiovaskulární systém
- DESATORO PRE PRAX: Aktuálne odporúčanie ESPEN pre nutričný manažment u pacientov s COVID-19
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- A Brief Patient-Reported Outcomes Quality of Life (PROQOL) Instrument to Improve Patient Care
- Burden of Depressive Disorders by Country, Sex, Age, and Year: Findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010
- From Ideals to Tools: Applying Human Rights to Maternal Health
- Role of DNA Methylation and Epigenetic Silencing of in Endometrial Cancer Development