From the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH (Samuel, Yaffe, Acuña, Krumins, and Kamath), and Northwell Health-Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY (Karkare).
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2022 Jul 1;30(13):621-628. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-21-01214. Epub 2022 Mar 15.
Although industry payments to physicians and surgeons remain a subject of controversy, relationships between industry and orthopaedic surgeons continue to grow. Notably, recent analyses have demonstrated significant increases in the rate and magnitude of payments among orthopaedic surgeons, despite the passing of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act in 2010. Given the concerns regarding how these relationships may affect the peer-review process, our analysis aimed to evaluate how payments among editorial board members of orthopaedic journals have changed over a contemporary time frame.
The Clarivate Analytics Impact Factor tool was used to identify all orthopaedic journals with a 2019 impact factor of ≥1.5. Editorial board members from these respective journals were identified from each journal's website. Subsequently, the Open Payments database by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was queried to identify industry payments received by these board members between 2014 and 2019. The quantity and magnitude of payments were then evaluated and compared over this study period. All monetary values were adjusted for inflation.
A total of 18 orthopaedic journals were included in our analysis. Of the 1,519 editorial board members identified, 711 (46.81%) received some form of industry payment in 2019. The total, average, and median payments over this study period decreased for 6 (31.6%), 7 (36.8%), and 8 of the included journals (44.44%), respectively. Six hundred twenty board members had higher average payments in 2019 than in 2014.
Our analysis demonstrated high rates of industry payments among editorial board members of high-impact orthopaedic journals. In addition, we demonstrated marked growth in the total, average, and median magnitude of these payments since the inception of the Open Payments database. Our findings encourage a continued need for transparency in related payments to ensure a fair and unbiased peer-review process, one that is separated from undue industry influence.
尽管工业界向医生和外科医生支付薪酬的问题仍然存在争议,但工业界与骨科医生之间的关系仍在继续发展。值得注意的是,尽管 2010 年通过了《医师薪酬阳光法案》,但最近的分析显示,骨科医生的薪酬率和规模都有显著增长。考虑到这些关系可能如何影响同行评审过程,我们的分析旨在评估骨科期刊编辑委员会成员的薪酬在当代时间段内是如何变化的。
使用 Clarivate Analytics Impact Factor 工具确定所有 2019 年影响因子≥1.5 的骨科期刊。从每个期刊的网站上确定这些期刊的编辑委员会成员。随后,通过医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心的 Open Payments 数据库查询这些委员会成员在 2014 年至 2019 年期间收到的工业界支付情况。然后评估并比较这段时间内的支付数量和规模。所有货币价值均已根据通货膨胀进行调整。
共有 18 种骨科期刊被纳入我们的分析。在所确定的 1519 名编辑委员会成员中,有 711 名(46.81%)在 2019 年收到了某种形式的工业界支付。在整个研究期间,6 种(31.6%)、7 种(36.8%)和 8 种(44.44%)期刊的总支付额、平均支付额和中位数支付额分别下降。620 名委员会成员在 2019 年的平均支付额高于 2014 年。
我们的分析表明,高影响力骨科期刊的编辑委员会成员中存在很高的工业界支付率。此外,我们还发现,自 Open Payments 数据库成立以来,这些支付的总额、平均支付额和中位数支付额均有显著增长。我们的研究结果鼓励在相关支付方面继续保持透明度,以确保公正、无偏见的同行评审过程,使其免受不当的行业影响。