Gagliardi Anna R, Lehoux Pascale, Ducey Ariel, Easty Anthony, Ross Sue, Bell Chaim, Trbovich Patricia, Urbach David R
Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Public Health Administration, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 30;12(3):e0174934. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174934. eCollection 2017.
Physician relationships with device industry representatives have not been previously assessed. This study explored interactions with device industry representatives among physicians who use implantable cardiovascular and orthopedic devices to identify whether conflict of interest (COI) is a concern and how it is managed.
A descriptive qualitative approach was used. Physicians who implant orthopedic and cardiovascular devices were identified in publicly available directories and web sites, and interviewed about their relationships with device industry representatives. Sampling was concurrent with data collection and analysis. Data were analyzed and discussed using constant comparative technique by all members of the research team.
Twenty-two physicians (10 cardiovascular, 12 orthopedic) were interviewed. Ten distinct representative roles were identified: purchasing, training, trouble-shooting, supplying devices, assisting with device assembly and insertion, supporting operating room staff, mitigating liability, conveying information about recalls, and providing direct and indirect financial support. Participants recognized the potential for COI but representatives were present for the majority of implantations. Participants revealed a tension between physicians and representatives that was characterized as "symbiotic", but required physicians to be vigilant about COI and patient safety, particularly because representatives varied regarding disclosure of device defects. They described a concurrent tension between hospitals, whose policies and business practices were focused on cost-control, and physicians who were required to comply with those policies and use particular devices despite concerns about their safety and effectiveness.
Given the potential for COI and threats to patient safety, further research is needed to establish the clinical implications of the role of, and relationship with device industry representatives; and whether and how hospitals do and should govern interaction with representatives, or support their staff in this regard.
此前尚未对医生与器械行业代表的关系进行评估。本研究探讨了使用植入式心血管和骨科器械的医生与器械行业代表之间的互动,以确定利益冲突(COI)是否令人担忧以及如何进行管理。
采用描述性定性方法。通过公开目录和网站识别出植入骨科和心血管器械的医生,并就他们与器械行业代表的关系进行访谈。抽样与数据收集和分析同时进行。研究团队的所有成员使用持续比较技术对数据进行分析和讨论。
对22名医生(10名心血管科医生,12名骨科医生)进行了访谈。确定了10种不同的代表角色:采购、培训、故障排除、提供器械、协助器械组装和植入、支持手术室工作人员、减轻责任、传达召回信息以及提供直接和间接的经济支持。参与者认识到存在利益冲突的可能性,但大多数植入手术都有代表在场。参与者揭示了医生和代表之间的一种紧张关系,其特点是“共生”,但要求医生对利益冲突和患者安全保持警惕,特别是因为代表在器械缺陷披露方面存在差异。他们描述了医院(其政策和商业行为侧重于成本控制)与医生之间同时存在的紧张关系,医生尽管对某些器械的安全性和有效性存在担忧,但仍被要求遵守这些政策并使用特定器械。
鉴于存在利益冲突的可能性以及对患者安全的威胁,需要进一步研究以确定器械行业代表的角色及其关系的临床意义;以及医院是否以及如何管理与代表的互动,或者在此方面支持其工作人员。