Department of Surgery, Division of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, 14506Kendall Regional Medical Center, Miami, FL, USA.
Department of Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.
Am Surg. 2023 Mar;89(3):362-371. doi: 10.1177/00031348211025750. Epub 2021 Jun 10.
Official conference participants (OCPs) consisting of speakers, moderators, discussants, and presenters) with conflicts of interest (COI) could negatively influence the audience's ability to fairly evaluate information if their COI is not properly disclosed. We aim to examine the patterns of COI disclosures by OCPs and the nature and extent of financial compensation at 3 annual trauma conferences.
A retrospective cohort analysis of COI disclosures of OCPs, in the EAST, WTA, and AAST Annual Meetings from 2016 to 2019. The Open Payments Database (OPD) was used to describe the nature and extent of financial compensation. Descriptive statistics and independent sample t-tests were performed with significance defined as < .05.
Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma: conflicts of interest ranged from 3.8 to 6.0% of OCPs. Moderators, discussants, and presenters comprised decreasing proportions disclosing COIs, whereas speakers comprised an increasing proportion. Western Trauma Association conflicts of interest ranged from 1.3 to 6.8% of OCPs. Moderators comprised an increasing proportion whereas speakers comprised a decreasing proportion. American Association for the Surgery of Trauma: conflicts of interest ranged from 3.6 to 5.4% of OCPs. Speakers, moderators, and presenters comprised progressively decreasing proportions, whereas discussants comprised an increasing proportion. Participants who did not disclose a COI comprised the majority of payment recipients in the OPD.
Official conference participants who disclosed a COI varied between EAST, WTA, and AAST Annual Meetings from 2016 to 2019. Implementation of standardized COI disclosure policies with explicitly communicated definitions/categories can maximize the participants' understanding of the disclosure process, translate into improved COI reporting, and preserve an evidence-based environment that is free from commercial influence for physicians to teach and learn.
具有利益冲突(COI)的官方会议参与者(OCP),包括演讲者、主持人、讨论者和报告者,如果其 COI 未得到妥善披露,可能会对观众公正评估信息的能力产生负面影响。我们旨在研究 3 个年度创伤会议中 OCP 的 COI 披露模式以及财务补偿的性质和程度。
对 2016 年至 2019 年 EAST、WTA 和 AAST 年会上 OCP 的 COI 披露情况进行回顾性队列分析。使用公开支付数据库(OPD)描述财务补偿的性质和程度。采用描述性统计和独立样本 t 检验,显著性定义为 <.05。
东部创伤外科学会(EAST):COI 占 OCP 的 3.8%至 6.0%。主持人、讨论者和报告者披露 COI 的比例逐渐降低,而演讲者的比例逐渐增加。西部创伤协会(WTA):COI 占 OCP 的 1.3%至 6.8%。主持人的比例逐渐增加,而演讲者的比例逐渐减少。美国创伤外科学会(AAST):COI 占 OCP 的 3.6%至 5.4%。演讲者、主持人和报告者的比例逐渐降低,而讨论者的比例逐渐增加。在 OPD 中,未披露 COI 的参与者是大多数支付接受者。
2016 年至 2019 年,在 EAST、WTA 和 AAST 年会上,披露 COI 的 OCP 各不相同。实施具有明确沟通定义/类别的标准化 COI 披露政策,可以最大限度地提高参与者对披露过程的理解,转化为改善的 COI 报告,并保持一个不受商业影响的基于证据的环境,使医生能够进行教学和学习。