Financial conflicts of interest in physicians' relationships with the pharmaceutical industry - Self-regulation in the shadow of federal prosecution

New England Journal of Medicine

Volumn 351, Issue 18, 2004, Pages 1891-1900

  Studdert, David M ^a   Mello, Michelle M ^a   Brennan, Troyen A ^a,b,c  

^a HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DRUG INDUSTRY; LAW; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL PROFESSION; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; REVIEW; ACCREDITATION COUNCIL FOR CONTINUING MEDICAL EDUCATION; AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS; ARTICLE; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; ETHICS; FORGERY; GIFT GIVING; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH; HISTORY; HUMAN; LEGAL APPROACH; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAID; MEDICARE; OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL; PATIENT REFERRAL; PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND MANUFACTURERS OF AMERICA (PHRMA); PHYSICIAN; POLICY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLIC RELATIONS; REIMBURSEMENT; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

ACCREDITATION COUNCIL FOR CONTINUING MEDICAL EDUCATION; AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS; HEALTH CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH; LEGAL APPROACH; OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL; PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND MANUFACTURERS OF AMERICA (PHRMA);

CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DRUG INDUSTRY; FRAUD; GIFT GIVING; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; GUIDELINES; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; HISTORY, 21ST CENTURY; HUMANS; INSURANCE, HEALTH, REIMBURSEMENT; INTERPROFESSIONAL RELATIONS; MEDICAID; MEDICARE; ORGANIZATIONAL POLICY; PHYSICIANS; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 6944247661     PISSN: 00284793     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMlim042229     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. American Medical Association. Opinion of the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, E-8.061. (Accessed October 7, 2004, at http://www.ama-assn. org/ama/pub/category/4001.html.)
2. Coyle SL. Physician-industry relations. 1. Individual physicians. Ann Intern Med 2002;136:396-402.
3. Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education. Standards for commercial support of continuing medical education. (Accessed October 7, 2004, at http://www.accme.org/incoming/17_system98_essential_areas.pdf.)
4. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Code on interactions with healthcare professionals. (Accessed October 7, 2004, at http://www.phrma.org/publications/policy/2004-01-19.391.pdf.)
5. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. OIG compliance program guidance for pharmaceutical manufacturers. Fed Regist 2003;68(86):23731-43. (Also available at http://oig.hhs.gov/authorities/docs/03/ 050503FRCPGPharmac. pdf.)
6. Kassirer JP. A piece of my mind: financial indigestion. JAMA 2000;284:2156-7.
7. Altman DE. The new Medicare prescription-drug legislation. N Engl J Med 2004;350:9-10.
8. Havighurst CC, Blumstein JF, Brennan TA. Health care law and policy: readings, notes, and questions. 2nd ed. New York: Foundation Press, 1998.
9. Thompson DF. Understanding financial conflicts of interest. N Engl J Med 1993;329:573-6.
10. Rosenthal MB, Berndt ER, Donohue JM, Frank RG, Epstein AM. Promotion of prescription drugs to consumers. N Engl J Med 2002;346:498-505.
11. Katz D, Caplan AL, Merz JF. All gifts large and small: toward an understanding of the ethics of pharmaceutical industry gift-giving. Am J Bioeth 2003;3(3):39-46.
12. Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 2003;289:454-65.
13. DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG. The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ 2003;22:151-85.
14. Bodenheimer T. Uneasy alliance: clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1539-44.
15. Morin K, Kakatansky H, Riddick FA Jr, et al. Managing conflicts of interest in the conduct of clinical trials. JAMA 2002;287:78-84.
16. Greider K. The big fix: how the pharmaceutical industry rips off American consumers. New York: Public Affairs, 2003.
17. Relman AS. Defending professional independence: ACCME's proposed new guidelines for commercial support of CME. JAMA 2003;289:2418-20.
18. Steinman MA, Shlipak MG, McPhee SJ. Of principles and pens: attitudes and practices of medicine housestaff toward pharmaceutical industry promotions. Am J Med 2001;110:551-7.
19. Wazana A. Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: is a gift everjust a gift? JAMA 2000;283:373-80.
20. Moses H III, Braunwald E, Martin JB, Thier SO. Collaborating with industry - choices for the academic medical center. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1371-5.
21. Chren MM, Landefeld CS. Physicians' behavior and their interactions with drug companies: a controlled study of physicians who requested additions to a hospital drug formulary. JAMA 1994;271:684-9.
22. Blumenthal D. Doctors and drug companies. N Engl J Med 2004;351:1885-90.
23. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. Prescription drug promotion involving payments and gifts: physicians' perspectives. OEI-01-90-00481, July 1992. (Accessed October 7, 2004, at http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-01-90-00481.pdf.)
24. Devlin P. The enforcement of morals. London: Oxford University Press, 1965.
25. Hart HLA. Law, Liberty, and morality. London: Oxford University Press, 1963.
26. 42 U.S.C. § 1320-7a (2004).
27. United States v. Greber, 760 F.2d 68, cert. denied, 474 U.S. 988 (1985).
28. United States v. Ruttenberg, 625 F.2d 173 (7th Cir. 1980).
29. United States v. Jain, 93 F.3d 436 (8th Cir. 1996).
30. United States v. Anderson, 31 F.Supp.2d 933 (D.Kan. 1998).
31. 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733 (2004).
32. Krause JH. "Promises to keep": health care providers and the civil False Claims Act. Cardozo Law Rev 2002;23:1363-418.
33. United States ex rel. Thompson v. Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp., 125 F.3d 899 (5th Cit. 1997).
34. Rabecs RN. Kickbacks as false claims: the use of the civil False Claims Act to prosecute violations of the federal health care program's anti-kickback statute. Mich State Law Rev 2001; Spring: 1-84.
35. Brooker GG. The False Claims Act: Congress giveth and the courts taketh away. Hamline Law Rev 2002;25:373-93.
36. Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Justice. Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program: annual report for FY 2002. (Accessed October 7, 2004, at http://www.usdoj.gov/ dag/pubdoc/hcfacreport2002.htm.)
37. United States v. TAP Pharmaceuticals, sentencing memorandum of the United States (Dec. 14, 2001), Criminal Action No. 01-CR-10354-WGY.
38. 21 U.S.C. § 333(b) (2004).
39. In re Lupron marketing sales practices litigation, 2003 W.L. 22839966 (D.Mass. 2003).
40. Petersen M. AstraZeneca pleads guilty in cancer medicine scheme. New York Times. June 21, 2003:C1.
41. Harris G. Guilty plea seen for drug maker. New York Times. July 16, 2004:A1.
42. Harris G. As doctor writes prescription, drug company writes a check. New York Times. June 27, 2004:A1.
43. Murphy S, Dembner A. All acquitted in drug kickbacks case: jury deals a blow to US prosecutors. Boston Globe. July 15, 2004: A1.
44. Dembner A, Murphy S. Clinic's ex-CEO said to be in talks to avoid charges. Boston Globe. March 5, 2004:A1.
45. Babcock L, Loewenstein G. Explaining bargaining impasse: the role of self-serving biases. J Econ Perspect 1997;11:109-26.
46. Dana J, Loewenstein G. A social science perspective on gifts to physicians from industry. JAMA 2003;290;252-5.