Industry payments to female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgeons: an analysis of Sunshine Act open payments from
- PDF / 498,673 Bytes
- 9 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 54 Downloads / 190 Views
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Industry payments to female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgeons: an analysis of Sunshine Act open payments from 2014–2017 Seth Teplitsky 1
&
Tomy Perez 1 & Joon Yau Leong 1 & Kevin Xie 1 & Alana Murphy 1 & Patrick J. Shenot 1
Received: 4 June 2019 / Accepted: 19 August 2019 # The International Urogynecological Association 2019
Abstract Introduction and hypothesis We aim to examine the financial relationship between industry and female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgeons (FPMRS) during the first four full calendar years since the implementation of the Sunshine Act. Methods All board-certified FPMRS specialists were identified using the American Board of Medical Specialties directory. Program directors (PDs) were identified using an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) database. All identified physicians were categorized by gender, specialty, and American Urological Association (AUA) region. Payment data for each individual from 2014 to 2017 were accessed using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Open Payments website. Statistical analyses were performed to elucidate payment trends. Results Of the 1,307 FPMRS physicians identified, 25.1% (n = 328) are urology-trained and 74.9% (n = 979) are obstetrics/ gynecology (OB/GYN)-trained. Of all physicians analyzed, 6.8% had no reported payments over the 4-year period. 90.1%, 86.5%, 85.3%, and 84.4% received some sort of payment in 2014 to 2017 respectively. Median total payments for all physicians decreased yearly, whereas mean payments decreased from 2014 to 2015 before increasing in all subsequent years. Median general payments were higher for men versus women, urology-trained versus OB/GYN-trained, and PDs versus non-PDs in all years analyzed. The largest contributor to overall payments was the “others” compensation category, which includes gifts, royalties, honoraria, and non-continuing medical education speaking engagements. Conclusions Since institution of the Sunshine Act, the percentage of physicians receiving payments has decreased each year. Additionally, there has been a decrease in median total payments and an increase in yearly research payments in all years analyzed. Keywords FPMRS . Urology . Urogynecology . Industry . Payment . Sunshine Act
Introduction The financial relationship between physicians and the biomedical and pharmaceutical industry has been a
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04098-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users * Patrick J. Shenot [email protected] 1
Department of Urology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, 1025 Walnut Street, Suite 1100, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA
longstanding subject of ethical debate, raising questions on the impact of these economic ties on patient care [1]. An estimated $57.5 billion, or 24.4% of total revenue, was spent on marketing in 2004 by pharmaceutical companies in the USA [2]. This
Data Loading...
