Dataset Information

Pharmacists' Perceptions of the Influence of Interactions with the Pharmaceutical Industry on Clinical Decision-Making.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is a paucity of literature examining the perceptions of Canadian pharmacists toward drug promotion by the pharmaceutical industry and pharmacist-industry interactions.

Objectives

To determine whether hospital pharmacists perceive their interactions with the pharmaceutical industry as influencing their clinical decision-making or that of their colleagues and whether hospital pharmacists perceive that interactions with the pharmaceutical industry create a conflict of interest.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey of the complete sample of hospital pharmacists practising in 3 large health authorities in a single Canadian province was conducted from February to April 2010.

Results

A total of 224 responses were received from the approximately 480 pharmacists in the target health authorities (response rate approximately 47%). Fifty-eight percent of respondents (127/218) did not believe that information received at industry-sponsored events influenced their clinical decision-making. Most (142/163 [87%]) disagreed that small gifts influenced their clinical decision-making, whereas responses were divided for large gifts. Respondents were also divided on the issue of whether their interactions created conflicts of interest, with most of those who had received gifts agreeing that large gifts would create a conflict of interest (134/163 [82%]) whereas small gifts would not (100/163 [61%]). There were positive correlations between respondents' beliefs about their own susceptibility to influence from sponsored events or receipt of small or large gifts and the susceptibility of others, but 22% of respondents (28/127) expressed a different perception about sponsored events, all believing themselves to be less influenced than their colleagues. Only 6% (4/64) of those who received large gifts and 4% (5/142) of those who received small gifts and felt they were not influenced by these gifts reported that it was likely others would be influenced by the receipt of such gifts.

Conclusions

Most hospital pharmacists who responded to this survey had attended industry-sponsored events, and the majority felt that it did not influence their clinical decision-making, despite recognition that the information received is unbalanced. Respondents were divided on the notion of whether these interactions led to conflicts of interest. Respondents generally felt that large and small gifts had different effects on influence and conflict of interest.

SUBMITTER: Tejani AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4605461 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Sep-Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pharmacists' Perceptions of the Influence of Interactions with the Pharmaceutical Industry on Clinical Decision-Making.

Tejani Aaron M AM Loewen Peter P Bachand Richard R Harder Curtis K CK

The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy 20150901 5

<h4>Background</h4>There is a paucity of literature examining the perceptions of Canadian pharmacists toward drug promotion by the pharmaceutical industry and pharmacist-industry interactions.<h4>Objectives</h4>To determine whether hospital pharmacists perceive their interactions with the pharmaceutical industry as influencing their clinical decision-making or that of their colleagues and whether hospital pharmacists perceive that interactions with the pharmaceutical industry create a conflict o ...[more]

PMID: 26478583

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhile shared decision making (SDM) and adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are important, some believe they are incompatible. This study explored the mutual influence between physicians' intention to engage in SDM and their intention to follow CPGs.MethodsEmbedded within a clustered randomized trial to assess the impact of training physicians in SDM about using antibiotics to treat acute respiratory tract infections, this study evaluated physicians' intentions to both engage in SDM and follow CPGs. A self-administered questionnaire based on the theory of planned behavior evaluated both behavioral intentions and their respective determinants (attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control) at study entry and exit. We used path analysis to explore the relationships between the intentions. We conducted statistical analyses using the maximum likelihood method and the variance-covariance matrix. Goodness of fit indices encompassed the chi-square statistic, the comparative fit index and the root mean square error of approximation.ResultsWe analyzed 244 responses at entry and 236 at exit. In the control group, at entry we observed that physicians' intention to engage in SDM (r?=?0, t?=?0.03) did not affect their intention to follow CPGs; however, their intention to follow CPGs (r?=?-0.31 t?=?-2.82) did negatively influence their intention to engage in SDM. At exit, neither behavioral intention influenced the other. In the experimental group, at entry neither behavioral intention influenced the other; at exit, the intention to engage in SDM still did not influence the intention to use CPGs, although the intention to follow CPGs (r?=?-0.15 t?=?-2.02) slightly negatively influenced the intention to engage in SDM, but this was not clinically significant.ConclusionPhysicians' intention to engage in SDM does not affect their intention to adopt CPGs even after SDM training. Physicians' intention to adopt CPGs had no clinically significant influence on intention to engage in SDM.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01116076.

Project description:BackgroundNon-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) allows women to access genetic information about their fetuses without the physical risk inherent to prior testing methods. The advent of NIPT technology has led to concerns regarding the quality and process of informed consent, as a view of NIPT as "routine" could impair women's considered approach when choosing to undergo testing. Prior studies evaluating NIPT decision-making have focused on the clinical encounter as the primary environment for acquisition of biomedical information and decision formation. While important, this conceptualization fails to consider how additional sources of knowledge, including embodied and empathetic experiential knowledge, shape perceptions of risk and the societal use of NIPT.MethodsIn order to address this issue, qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 25 women who had been offered NIPT were performed. Participants came from a well-resourced, rural setting near a major academic medical center in the US. Women were categorized by NIPT use/non-use as well as whether their described decision-making process was perceived as making a significant decision requiring contemplation ("significant") versus a rapid or immediate decision ("routinized"). A constructivist general inductive approach was used to explore themes in the data, develop a framework of NIPT decision-making, and compare the perceptions of women with differential decision-making processes and outcomes.ResultsA framework for decision-making regarding NIPT was developed based on three emergent factors: perceptions of the societal use of NIPT, expected emotional impact of genetic information, and perceived utility of genetic information. Analysis revealed that perceptions of widespread use of NIPT, pervasive societal narratives of NIPT use as "forward-thinking," and a perception of information as anxiety-relieving contributed to routinized uptake of NIPT. In contrast, women who displayed a lack of routinization expressed fewer stereotypes regarding the audience for NIPT and relied on communication with their social networks to consider how they might use the information provided by NIPT.ConclusionsThe findings of this study reveal the societal narratives and perceptions that shape differential decision-making regarding NIPT in the U.S.ContextUnderstanding and addressing these perceptions that influence NIPT decision-making, especially routinized uptake of NIPT, is important as the use and scope of this technology increases.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To understand and report on the nature of patient group interactions with the pharmaceutical industry from the perspective of patient group representatives by exploring the range of attitudes towards pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and how, why, and when interactions occur. DESIGN:Empirical qualitative interview study informed by ethics theory. SETTING:Australian patient groups. PARTICIPANTS:27 participants from 23 Australian patient groups that represented diverse levels of financial engagement with the pharmaceutical industry. Groups were focused on general health consumer issues or disease specific topics, and had regional or national jurisdictions. ANALYSIS:Analytic techniques were informed by grounded theory. Interview transcripts were coded into data driven categories. Findings were organised into new conceptual categories to describe and explain the data, and were supported by quotes. RESULTS:A range of attitudes towards pharmaceutical industry sponsorship were identified that are presented as four different types of relationship between patient groups and the pharmaceutical industry. The dominant relationship type was of a successful business partnership, and participants described close working relationships with industry personnel. These participants acknowledged a potential for adverse industry influence, but expressed confidence in existing strategies for avoiding industry influence. Other participants described unsatisfactory or undeveloped relationships, and some participants (all from general health consumer groups) presented their groups' missions as incompatible with the pharmaceutical industry because of fundamentally opposing interests. Participants reported that interactions between their patient group and pharmaceutical companies were more common when companies had new drugs of potential interest to group members. Patient groups that accepted industry funding engaged in exchanges of "assets" with companies. Groups received money, information, and advice in exchange for providing companies with marketing, relationship building opportunities with key opinion leaders, coordinated lobbying with companies about drug access and subsidy, assisting companies with clinical trial recruitment, and enhancing company credibility. CONCLUSIONS:An understanding of the range of views patient groups have about pharmaceutical company sponsorship will be useful for groups that seek to identify and manage any ethical concerns about these relationships. Patient groups that receive pharmaceutical industry money should anticipate they might be asked for specific assets in return. Selective industry funding of groups where active product marketing opportunities exist might skew the patient group sector's activity towards pharmaceutical industry interests and allow industry to exert proxy influence over advocacy and subsequent health policy.

Project description:BackgroundIncreasingly, medical school policies limit pharmaceutical representatives' access to students and gifts from drugmakers, but little is known about how these policies affect student attitudes toward industry.ObjectiveTo assess interactions between trainees and the pharmaceutical industry, and to determine whether learning environment characteristics influence students' practices and attitudes.Design, participantsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey with a nationally-representative sample of first- and fourth-year medical students and third-year residents, stratified by medical school, including ? 14 randomly selected trainees at each level per school.Main measuresWe measured frequency of industry interactions and attitudes regarding how such interactions affect medical training and the profession. Chi-squared tests assessed bivariate linear trend, and hierarchical logistic regression models were fitted to assess associations between trainees' attitudes and their schools' National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding levels and American Medical Student Association (AMSA) PharmFree Scorecard grades reflecting industry-related conflict of interest policies.Key resultsAmong 1,610 student (49.3 % response rate) and 739 resident (43.1 %) respondents, industry-sponsored gifts were common, rising from 33.0 % (first-year students) to 56.8 % (fourth-year students) and 54 % (residents) (p?<?0.001). These gifts included meals outside the hospital (reported by 5 % first-year students, 13.4 % fourth-year students, 27.5 % residents (p?<?0.001)) and free drug samples (reported by 7.4 % first-year students, 14.1 % fourth-year students, 14.3 % residents (p?<?0.001)). The perception that industry interactions lead to bias was prevalent, but the belief that physicians receive valuable education through these interactions increased (64.1 % to 67.5 % to 79.8 %, p?<?0.001). Students in schools receiving more NIH funding reported industry gifts less often (OR?=?0.51, 95 % CI: 0.38-0.68, p?<?0.001), but the strength of institutional conflict of interest policies was not associated with this variable.ConclusionsDespite recent policy changes, a substantial number of trainees continue to receive gifts from pharmaceutical representatives. We found no relation between these outcomes and a school's policies concerning interactions with industry.

Dataset Information

Pharmacists' Perceptions of the Influence of Interactions with the Pharmaceutical Industry on Clinical Decision-Making.

Background

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Pharmacists' Perceptions of the Influence of Interactions with the Pharmaceutical Industry on Clinical Decision-Making.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets