From the Department of Neurology, Little Rock, AR (K.N., S.S., P.V., Y.H., A.B., N.K., S.O.).
Department of Pharmacy Practice (C.L.), University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock.
Stroke. 2020 Apr;51(4):1339-1343. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.027967. Epub 2020 Feb 12.
Background and Purpose- Industry payments to physicians raise concerns regarding conflicts of interest that could impact patient care. We explored nonresearch and nonownership payments from industry to vascular neurologists to identify trends in compensation. Methods- Using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology data, we explored financial relationships between industry and US vascular neurologists from 2013 to 2018. We analyzed payment characteristics, including payment categories, payment distribution among physicians, regional trends, and biomedical manufacturers. Furthermore, we analyzed the top 1% (by compensation) of vascular neurologists with detailed payment categories, their position, and their contribution to stroke guidelines. Results- The number of board certified vascular neurologist increased from 1169 in 2013 to 1746 in 2018. The total payments to vascular neurologist increased from $99 749 in 2013 to $1 032 302 in 2018. During the study period, 16% to 17% of vascular neurologists received industry payments. Total payments from industry and mean physician payments increased yearly over this period, with consulting fee (31.1%) and compensation for services other than consulting (30.7%) being the highest paid categories. The top 10 manufacturers made the majority of the payments, and the top 10 products changed from drug or biological products to devices. Physicians from south region of the United States received the highest total payment (38.72%), which steadily increased. Payments to top 1% vascular neurologists increased from 64% to 79% over the period as payments became less evenly distributed. Among the top 1%, 42% specialized in neuro intervention, 11% contributed to American Heart Association/American Stroke Association guidelines, and around 75% were key leaders in the field. Conclusions- A small proportion of US vascular neurologists consistently received the majority of industry payments, the value of which grew over the study period. Only 11% of the top 1% receiving industry payments have authored American Heart Association/American Stroke Association guidelines, but ≈75% seem to be key leaders in the field. Whether this influences clinical practice and behavior requires further investigation.
背景与目的- 业内向医生支付薪酬引起了人们对利益冲突的担忧,这些冲突可能会影响患者的护理。我们调查了业内向血管神经学家支付的非研究和非所有权薪酬,以确定薪酬趋势。
方法- 使用医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心以及美国精神病学和神经病学委员会的数据,我们从 2013 年到 2018 年探索了业内与美国血管神经学家之间的财务关系。我们分析了支付特征,包括支付类别、医生之间的支付分布、区域趋势和生物医学制造商。此外,我们分析了薪酬最高的 1%(按薪酬计算)血管神经学家的详细支付类别、他们的职位以及他们对中风指南的贡献。
结果- 经董事会认证的血管神经学家人数从 2013 年的 1169 人增加到 2018 年的 1746 人。向血管神经学家的总薪酬从 2013 年的 99749 美元增加到 2018 年的 1032302 美元。在研究期间,16%至 17%的血管神经学家收到了业内支付。在此期间,来自业内的总薪酬和每位医生的平均薪酬逐年增加,咨询费(31.1%)和非咨询服务补偿(30.7%)是薪酬最高的类别。前 10 名制造商支付了大部分款项,前 10 名产品从药物或生物产品变为设备。来自美国南部地区的医生收到的总薪酬(38.72%)最高,且稳步增加。在这段时间内,前 1%的血管神经学家的薪酬从 64%增加到 79%,薪酬分配变得更加不均匀。在这 1%中,42%专门从事神经介入治疗,11%为美国心脏协会/美国中风协会指南做出了贡献,约 75%是该领域的关键领导者。
结论- 一小部分美国血管神经学家一直收到业内支付的大部分款项,而且这些款项在研究期间有所增加。只有 11%的薪酬最高的 1%接受业内支付的人撰写了美国心脏协会/美国中风协会指南,但 ≈75%的人似乎是该领域的关键领导者。这是否会影响临床实践和行为还需要进一步调查。