Brax Hneine, Fadlallah Racha, Al-Khaled Lina, Kahale Lara A, Nas Hala, El-Jardali Fadi, Akl Elie A
Faculty of Medicine, Université Saint Joseph, Beirut, Lebanon.
Center for Systematic Reviews of Health Policy and Systems Research (SPARK), American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 13;12(4):e0175493. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175493. eCollection 2017.
Pharmaceutical company representatives likely influence the prescribing habits and professional behaviors of physicians. The objective of this study was to systematically review the association between physicians' interactions with pharmaceutical companies and their clinical practices.
We used the standard systematic review methodology. Observational and experimental study designs examining any type of targeted interaction between practicing physicians and pharmaceutical companies were eligible. The search strategy included a search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases up to July 2016. Two reviewers selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate and independently. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.
Twenty articles reporting on 19 studies met our inclusion criteria. All of these studies were conducted in high-income countries and examined different types of interactions, including detailing, industry-funded continuing medical education, and receiving free gifts. While all included studies assessed prescribing behaviors, four studies also assessed financial outcomes, one assessed physicians' knowledge, and one assessed their beliefs. None of the studies assessed clinical outcomes. Out of the 19 studies, 15 found a consistent association between interactions promoting a medication, and inappropriately increased prescribing rates, lower prescribing quality, and/or increased prescribing costs. The remaining four studies found both associations and lack of significant associations for the different types of exposures and drugs examined in the studies. A meta-analysis of six of these studies found a statistically significant association between exposure and physicians' prescribing behaviors (OR = 2.52; 95% CI 1.82-3.50). The quality of evidence was downgraded to moderate for risk of bias and inconsistency. Sensitivity analysis excluding studies at high risk of bias did not substantially change these results. A subgroup analysis did not find a difference by type of exposure.
There is moderate quality evidence that physicians' interactions with pharmaceutical companies are associated with their prescribing patterns and quality.
制药公司代表可能会影响医生的处方习惯和专业行为。本研究的目的是系统评价医生与制药公司之间的互动与其临床实践之间的关联。
我们采用标准的系统评价方法。纳入观察性和实验性研究设计,这些研究考察执业医生与制药公司之间任何类型的定向互动。检索策略包括检索截至2016年7月的MEDLINE和EMBASE数据库。两名评价员独立重复筛选研究、提取数据并评估偏倚风险。我们使用GRADE方法评估证据质量。
20篇报道19项研究的文章符合我们的纳入标准。所有这些研究均在高收入国家进行,考察了不同类型的互动,包括药品推广、行业资助的继续医学教育以及接受免费礼品。虽然所有纳入研究均评估了处方行为,但有4项研究还评估了经济结果,1项评估了医生的知识,1项评估了他们的信念。没有研究评估临床结局。在这19项研究中,15项发现推广某种药物的互动与不适当的处方率增加、处方质量降低和/或处方成本增加之间存在一致关联。其余4项研究发现,对于研究中考察的不同类型的暴露和药物,既存在关联,也缺乏显著关联。对其中6项研究进行的荟萃分析发现,暴露与医生的处方行为之间存在统计学显著关联(OR = 2.52;95%CI 1.82 - 3.50)。由于存在偏倚风险和不一致性,证据质量被降为中等。排除高偏倚风险研究的敏感性分析并未实质性改变这些结果。亚组分析未发现不同暴露类型之间存在差异。
有中等质量的证据表明,医生与制药公司之间的互动与其处方模式和质量相关。