Alkhaled Lina, Kahale Lara, Nass Hala, Brax Hneine, Fadlallah Racha, Badr Kamal, Akl Elie A
Faculty of Medicine, Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
BMJ Open. 2014 Jul 1;4(7):e004880. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-004880.
Pharmaceutical company representatives likely influence the prescribing habits and professional behaviour of physicians.
The objective of this study was to systematically review the effects of interventions targeting practising physicians' interactions with pharmaceutical companies.
We included observational studies, non-randomised controlled trials (non-RCTs) and RCTs evaluating legislative, educational, policy or other interventions targeting the interactions between physicians and pharmaceutical companies.
The search strategy included an electronic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE. Two reviewers performed duplicate and independent study selection, data abstraction and assessment of risk of bias.
We assessed the risk of bias in each included study. We summarised the findings narratively because the nature of the data did not allow a meta-analysis to be conducted. We assessed the quality of evidence by outcome using the GRADE methodology.
Of 11 189 identified citations, one RCT and three observational studies met the eligibility criteria. All four studies specifically targeted one type of interaction with pharmaceutical companies, that is, interactions with drug representatives. The RCT provided moderate quality evidence of no effect of a 'collaborative approach' between the pharmaceutical industry and a health authority. The three observational studies provided low quality evidence suggesting a positive effect of policies aiming to reduce interaction between physicians and pharmaceutical companies (by restricting free samples, promotional material, and meetings with pharmaceutical company representatives) on prescription behaviour.
We identified too few studies to allow strong conclusions.
Available evidence suggests a potential impact of policies aiming to reduce interaction between physicians and drug representatives on physicians' prescription behaviour. We found no evidence concerning interventions affecting other types of interaction with pharmaceutical companies.
制药公司代表可能会影响医生的处方习惯和职业行为。
本研究的目的是系统评价针对执业医生与制药公司互动的干预措施的效果。
我们纳入了观察性研究、非随机对照试验(非RCT)和RCT,这些研究评估了针对医生与制药公司互动的立法、教育、政策或其他干预措施。
检索策略包括对MEDLINE和EMBASE进行电子检索。两名评审员独立进行重复的研究筛选、数据提取和偏倚风险评估。
我们评估了每项纳入研究的偏倚风险。由于数据性质不允许进行荟萃分析,我们采用叙述性方法总结研究结果。我们使用GRADE方法按结果评估证据质量。
在11189条检索到的文献中,1项RCT和3项观察性研究符合纳入标准。所有4项研究均专门针对与制药公司的一种互动类型,即与药品代表的互动。该RCT提供了中等质量的证据,表明制药行业与卫生当局之间的“合作方法”没有效果。3项观察性研究提供了低质量的证据,表明旨在减少医生与制药公司互动(通过限制免费样品、促销材料以及与制药公司代表的会面)的政策对处方行为有积极影响。
我们找到的研究数量太少,无法得出有力结论。
现有证据表明,旨在减少医生与药品代表互动的政策可能会对医生的处方行为产生影响。我们没有发现关于影响与制药公司其他互动类型的干预措施的证据。