Craig Klugman
The American Journal of Bioethics
Volume 17, 2017 - Issue 6
Chimonas, DeVito and Rothman (2017) offer a descriptive target article that examines physicians' knowledge of and reaction to the Sunshine Act's Open Payments Database. This program is a federal computer repository of all payments and goods with a worth over $10 made from pharmaceutical companies and device manufacturers to physicians. Created under the 2010 Affordable Care Act, the goal of this database is to make the relationships between physicians and the medical drug/device industry more transparent. Such transparency is often touted as a solution to financial conflicts of interest (COI). A COI occurs when a person owes featly to more than one party. For example, physicians have fiduciary duties toward patients. At the same time, when physicians receive gifts or benefits from a pharmaceutical company, they are more likely to prescribe that company's products (Spurling et al. 2010). The gift creates a sense of a moral obligation toward the company. These two interests can be (but may not be) in conflict. Such arrangements can undermine a patient's trust with his/her physician, and more broadly, the public's trust of medicine.
(cut)
The idea is that if people are told about the conflict, then they can judge for themselves whether the provider is compromised and whether they wish to receive care from this person. The database exists with this intent—that transparency alone is enough. What is a patient to do with this information? Should patients avoid physicians who have conflicts? The decision is left in the patient's hands. Back in 2014, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America lobbying group expressed concern that the public would not understand the context of any payments or gifts to physicians (Castellani 2014).
The article is here.
Showing posts with label Sunshine Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sunshine Act. Show all posts
Thursday, June 8, 2017
Monday, August 17, 2015
Doctors got $84M from drug companies
By Lauryn Schroeder
The San Diego Union Tribune
Originally published July 29, 2015
Doctors in San Diego County received $84 million in payouts from drug and medical device companies last year, according to federal data.
Health professionals received payments for services such as consulting, promotional speaking and research, as well as gifts in the form of meals and entertainment, according to a review of federal data by The San Diego Union-Tribune. More than 107,000 transactions were documented.
The information is being gathered and disclosed as part of a federal effort to bring more transparency to relationships that could lead to conflicts of interest, if doctors take money or gifts and then prescribe certain drugs.
The San Diego data was dominated by some larger transactions, such as a doctor collecting royalties on an invention, or a La Jolla couple who recently sold their medical device maker to one of the large drug companies.
The entire article is here.
The San Diego Union Tribune
Originally published July 29, 2015
Doctors in San Diego County received $84 million in payouts from drug and medical device companies last year, according to federal data.
Health professionals received payments for services such as consulting, promotional speaking and research, as well as gifts in the form of meals and entertainment, according to a review of federal data by The San Diego Union-Tribune. More than 107,000 transactions were documented.
The information is being gathered and disclosed as part of a federal effort to bring more transparency to relationships that could lead to conflicts of interest, if doctors take money or gifts and then prescribe certain drugs.
The San Diego data was dominated by some larger transactions, such as a doctor collecting royalties on an invention, or a La Jolla couple who recently sold their medical device maker to one of the large drug companies.
The entire article is here.
Friday, October 10, 2014
Doctors Net Billions From Drug Firms
By Peter Loftus
The Wall Street Journal
Originally posted September 30, 2014
Drug and medical-device companies paid at least $3.5 billion to U.S. physicians and teaching hospitals during the final five months of last year, according to the most comprehensive accounting so far of the financial ties that some critics say have compromised medical care.
The figures come from a new federal government transparency initiative. The 2010 Affordable Care Act included a provision dubbed the Sunshine Act, which requires manufacturers of drugs and medical devices to disclose the payments they make to physicians and teaching hospitals each year for services such as consulting or research. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services compiled the records into a database posted online Tuesday, though the agency said that about 40% of the payment information won't identify the recipients because of data problems.
The entire article is here.
The Wall Street Journal
Originally posted September 30, 2014
Drug and medical-device companies paid at least $3.5 billion to U.S. physicians and teaching hospitals during the final five months of last year, according to the most comprehensive accounting so far of the financial ties that some critics say have compromised medical care.
The figures come from a new federal government transparency initiative. The 2010 Affordable Care Act included a provision dubbed the Sunshine Act, which requires manufacturers of drugs and medical devices to disclose the payments they make to physicians and teaching hospitals each year for services such as consulting or research. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services compiled the records into a database posted online Tuesday, though the agency said that about 40% of the payment information won't identify the recipients because of data problems.
The entire article is here.
Saturday, May 10, 2014
UC OKs paying surgeon $10 million in whistleblower-retaliation case
By Chad Terhune
The Los Angeles Times
Originally published April 22, 2014
University of California regents agreed to pay $10 million to the former chairman of UCLA's orthopedic surgery department, who had alleged that the well-known medical school allowed doctors to take industry payments that may have compromised patient care.
(cut)
The seven-week trial in downtown Los Angeles offered a rare glimpse into those potential conflicts at a time when there is growing government scrutiny of industry payments to doctors.
Starting this fall, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, part of President Obama's healthcare law, requires public disclosure of financial relationships between healthcare companies and physicians.
The entire article is here.
The Los Angeles Times
Originally published April 22, 2014
University of California regents agreed to pay $10 million to the former chairman of UCLA's orthopedic surgery department, who had alleged that the well-known medical school allowed doctors to take industry payments that may have compromised patient care.
(cut)
The seven-week trial in downtown Los Angeles offered a rare glimpse into those potential conflicts at a time when there is growing government scrutiny of industry payments to doctors.
Starting this fall, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, part of President Obama's healthcare law, requires public disclosure of financial relationships between healthcare companies and physicians.
The entire article is here.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
A Few Predictions on the Sunshine Act
By Genevieve Pham-Kanter
The Lab @ Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics - Harvard
The Sunshine Act–for those of you who did not meticulously read all 11,000 sections of Bill HR 3590–is that part of last year's health care reform law that requires pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to report payments that they make to doctors for consulting services, speaking, meals, research grants, and other gifts of monetary value.
These payments have long been cause for concern because of their potential to influence the prescribing and research practices of payment recipients (for background, see this Institute of Medicine report). Surely requiring the disclosure of these potentially distorting payments would be a good thing; what more needs to be said?
The entire story is here.
The Lab @ Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics - Harvard
The Sunshine Act–for those of you who did not meticulously read all 11,000 sections of Bill HR 3590–is that part of last year's health care reform law that requires pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to report payments that they make to doctors for consulting services, speaking, meals, research grants, and other gifts of monetary value.
These payments have long been cause for concern because of their potential to influence the prescribing and research practices of payment recipients (for background, see this Institute of Medicine report). Surely requiring the disclosure of these potentially distorting payments would be a good thing; what more needs to be said?
The entire story is here.
Thursday, September 5, 2013
Doctors Face New Scrutiny Over Gifts
By Peter Loftus
The Wall Street Journal
Originally published August 22, 2013
U.S. doctors are bracing for increased public scrutiny of
the payments and gifts they receive from pharmaceutical and medical-device
companies as a result of the new health law.
Starting this month, companies must record nearly every
transaction with doctors—from sales reps bearing pizza to compensation for
expert advice on research—to comply with the so-called Sunshine Act provision
of the U.S. health-care overhaul. The companies must report data on individual
doctors and how much they received to a federal health agency, which will post
it on a searchable, public website beginning September 2014.
Many doctors say the increased disclosures are making
them rethink their relationships with industry, citing concerns about privacy
and accuracy, and worry that the public will misinterpret the information. Some
fear patients will view the payments as tainting their medical decisions, and
will lump together compensation for research-related services with payments of
a more promotional nature.
Saturday, February 16, 2013
CMS Issues Sunshine Rule
By Joyce Frieden, News Editor, MedPage Today
Published: February 01, 2013
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued a long-awaited rule Friday finalizing the details for a database that will list payments made to physicians by pharmaceutical and device manufacturers.
"You should know when your doctor has a financial relationship with the companies that manufacture or supply the medicines or medical devices you may need," Peter Budetti, MD, the agency's deputy administrator for program integrity, said in a statement. "Disclosure of these relationships allows patients to have more informed discussions with their doctors."
The rule, a provision of the Affordable Care Act known as the Physician Payments Sunshine Act, "finalizes the provisions that require manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologicals, and medical supplies covered by Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children's Health Insurance Program to report payments or other transfers of value they make to physicians and teaching hospitals to CMS," the statement explained. "CMS will post that data to a public website. The final rule also requires manufacturers and group purchasing organizations (GPOs) to disclose to CMS physician ownership or investment interests."
Data collection will start on Aug. 1, CMS said, noting that "Applicable manufacturers and applicable GPOs will report the data for August through December of 2013 to CMS by March 31, 2014 and CMS will release the data on a public website by Sept. 30, 2014. CMS is developing an electronic system to facilitate the reporting process."
The rule "is intended to help reduce the potential for conflicts of interest that physicians or teaching hospitals could face as a result of their relationships with manufacturers," the statement continued.
The American Medical Association responded cautiously to the release of the final rule. "The AMA will carefully review the new Physician Payment Sunshine Act rule," AMA President Jeremy Lazarus, MD, said in a statement. "Physicians' relationships with the pharmaceutical industry should be transparent and focused on benefits to patients ... As the rule is implemented, we will work to make sure physicians have up-to-date information about the new reporting process."
The entire story is here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)