Fadlallah Racha, Nas Hala, Naamani Dana, El-Jardali Fadi, Hammoura Ihsan, Al-Khaled Lina, Brax Hneine, Kahale Lara, Akl Elie A
Department of Health Management and Policy, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
Center for Systematic Reviews of Health Policy and Systems Research (SPARK), American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 24;11(8):e0160540. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160540. eCollection 2016.
To systematically review the evidence on the knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of patients and the general public towards the interactions of physicians with the pharmaceutical and the device industry.
We included quantitative and qualitative studies addressing any type of interactions between physicians and the industry. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE in August 2015. Two reviewers independently completed data selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological features. We summarized the findings narratively stratified by type of interaction, outcome and country.
Of the 11,902 identified citations, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria. Many studies failed to meet safeguards for protecting from bias. In studies focusing on physicians and the pharmaceutical industry, the percentages of participants reporting awareness was higher for office-use gifts relative to personal gifts. Also, participants were more accepting of educational and office-use gifts compared to personal gifts. The findings were heterogeneous for the perceived effects of physician-industry interactions on prescribing behavior, quality and cost of care. Generally, participants supported physicians' disclosure of interactions through easy-to-read printed documents and verbally. In studies focusing on surgeons and device manufacturers, the majority of patients felt their care would improve or not be affected if surgeons interacted with the device industry. Also, they felt surgeons would make the best choices for their health, regardless of financial relationship with the industry. Participants generally supported regulation of surgeon-industry interactions, preferably through professional rather than governmental bodies.
The awareness of participants was low for physicians' receipt of personal gifts. Participants also reported greater acceptability and fewer perceived influence for office-use gifts compared to personal gifts. Overall, there appears to be lower awareness, less concern and more acceptance of surgeon-device industry interactions relative to physician-pharmaceutical industry interactions. We discuss the implications of the findings at the patient, provider, organizational, and systems level.
系统评价患者及普通公众对于医生与制药和器械行业互动的知识、信念和态度方面的证据。
我们纳入了涉及医生与行业之间任何类型互动的定量和定性研究。2015年8月检索了MEDLINE和EMBASE。两名评审员独立完成数据选择、数据提取和方法学特征评估。我们按互动类型、结果和国家对研究结果进行了叙述性总结。
在11902条检索到的文献中,20项研究符合纳入标准。许多研究未达到防止偏倚的保障措施。在关注医生与制药行业的研究中,报告知晓办公室用礼品的参与者比例高于个人礼品。此外,与个人礼品相比,参与者更能接受教育和办公室用礼品。关于医生与行业互动对处方行为、医疗质量和成本的感知影响,研究结果存在异质性。总体而言,参与者支持医生通过易于阅读的印刷文件和口头方式披露互动情况。在关注外科医生与器械制造商的研究中,大多数患者认为如果外科医生与器械行业互动,他们的医疗护理会得到改善或不受影响。此外,他们认为外科医生会为他们的健康做出最佳选择,无论与行业的财务关系如何。参与者普遍支持对外科医生与行业互动进行监管,最好通过专业机构而非政府机构。
参与者对医生收受个人礼品的知晓度较低。与个人礼品相比,参与者也报告称对办公室用礼品的接受度更高,感知影响更小。总体而言,相对于医生与制药行业的互动,对外科医生与器械行业互动的知晓度似乎更低,关注度更低,接受度更高。我们在患者、提供者、组织和系统层面讨论了研究结果的影响。