| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Larkin, James, et al.
(författare)
-
Payments to healthcare organisations reported by the medical device industry in Europe from 2017 to 2019 : An observational study
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Health Policy and Technology. - 2211-8837. ; 13:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: Medical device industry payments to healthcare organisations (HCOs) can create conflicts of interest which can undermine patient care. One way of addressing this concern is by enhancing transparency of industry financial support to HCOs. MedTech Europe, a medical device trade body, operate a system of disclosure of education payments to European HCOs. This study aimed to characterise payments reported in this database and to evaluate the disclosure system. Methods: An observational study of education-related payments to HCOs reported by the medical device industry in Europe was conducted. Data was manually extracted from transparentmedtech.eu. The primary outcome variable is the value of the payments, overall, and for each year, payment type, and country. The accessibility, availability and quality of the database was also analysed, using a proforma with 15 measures. Results: Overall, 116 medical device companies reported education-related payments in 53 European and non-European countries, valuing over €425 million between 2017 and 2019, increasing in value between 2017 and 2019, from €93,798,419 to €175,414,302. Ten countries accounted for 94% of all payments and ten companies accounted for 80% of all payments. The accessibility, availability and quality of the database rated low for six measures, medium for six measures, and high for three measures. Conclusion: There is a large amount of education-related payments from medical device companies to European HCOs, creating substantial potential for conflicts of interest. MedTech Europe's disclosure system has many shortcomings. A European-wide publicly mandated disclosure system for both the medical device and pharmaceutical industries should be introduced. Public interest summary: The medical device industry pay healthcare organisations (e.g. hospitals) large amounts of money. Industry states that this money is to help pay for healthcare professionals’ education. However, these payments can have a negative impact on healthcare professionals’ decision-making. This study sought to examine a website run by MedTech Europe, a representative body for the medical device industry, which outlines details of some of these payments (www.transparentmedtech.eu). Our analysis found that between 2017 and 2019 the medical device industry made ‘education’ payments valuing €425 million to healthcare organisations in Europe. We also assessed how comprehensive and user-friendly the database was and found a range of issues. For example, the database is not downloadable and some other important types of payments, such as payments for consultancy, are not included. We concluded that a mandatory database for both the medical device and pharmaceutical industry run by the European Union, would significantly improve transparency.
|
|
| 3. |
- Ozieranski, Piotr, et al.
(författare)
-
International comparison of pharmaceutical industry payment disclosures in the UK and Japan: implications for self-regulation, public regulation, and transparency
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Globalization and Health. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1744-8603. ; 19:14, s. 1-42
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundSelf-regulation of payment disclosure by pharmaceutical industry trade groups is a major global approach to increasing transparency of financial relationships between drug companies and healthcare professionals and organisations. Nevertheless, little is known about the relative strengths and weaknesses of self-regulation across countries, especially beyond Europe. To address this gap in research and stimulate international policy learning, we compare the UK and Japan, the likely strongest cases of self-regulation of payment disclosure in Europe and Asia, across three dimensions of transparency: disclosure rules, practices, and data.ResultsThe UK and Japanese self-regulation of payment disclosure had shared as well unique strengths and weaknesses. The UK and Japanese pharmaceutical industry trade groups declared transparency as the primary goal of payment disclosure, without, however, explaining the link between the two. The rules of payment disclosure in each country provided more insight into some payments but not others. Both trade groups did not reveal the recipients of certain payments by default, and the UK trade group also made the disclosure of some payments conditional on recipient consent. Drug company disclosure practices were more transparent in the UK, allowing for greater availability and accessibility of payment data and insight into underreporting or misreporting of payments by companies. Nevertheless, the share of payments made to named recipients was three times higher in Japan than in the UK, indicating higher transparency of disclosure data.ConclusionsThe UK and Japan performed differently across the three dimensions of transparency, suggesting that any comprehensive analysis of self-regulation of payment disclosure must triangulate analysis of disclosure rules, practices, and data. We found limited evidence to support key claims regarding the strengths of self-regulation, while often finding it inferior to public regulation of payment disclosure. We suggest how the self-regulation of payment disclosure in each country can be enhanced and, in the long run, replaced by public regulation to strengthen the industry’s accountability to the public.
|
|
