Abstract
PURPOSE: Little is known about the factors that influence housestaff attitudes toward
pharmaceutical industry promotions or, how such attitudes correlate with physician
behaviors. We studied these attitudes and practices among internal medicine housestaff.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Confidential surveys about attitudes and behaviors toward industry
gifts were distributed to 1st- and 2nd-year residents at a university-based internal
medicine residency program.
RESULTS: Ninety percent of the residents (105 of 117) completed the survey. A majority
of respondents considered seven of nine types of promotions appropriate. Residents
judged the appropriateness of promotions on the basis of their cost (median percentage
of items considered appropriate 100% for inexpensive items vs. 60% for expensive ones)
more than on the basis of their educational value (80% for educational items vs. 75%
for noneducational ones; P <.001 for comparison of appropriateness based on cost vs. educational value). Behaviors
were often inconsistent with attitudes; every resident who considered conference lunches
(n = 13) and pens (n = 18) inappropriate had accepted these gifts. Most respondents (61%) stated that
industry promotions and contacts did not influence their own prescribing, but only
16% believed other physicians were similarly unaffected (P <.0001). Nonetheless, more than two thirds of residents agreed that it is appropriate
for a medical institution to have rules on industry interactions with residents and
faculty.
CONCLUSIONS: Residents hold generally positive attitudes toward gifts from industry,
believe they are not influenced by them, and report behaviors that are often inconsistent
with their attitudes. Thoughtful education and policy programs may help residents
learn to critically appraise these gifts.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to The American Journal of MedicineAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
Zuger A. Fever pitch: getting doctors to prescribe is big business. The New York Times. 1999 Jan 11;Sect:A:1 (col. 4).
- Gifts to physicians from industry.JAMA. 1991; 265: 501
- Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry. Is a gift ever just a gift?.JAMA. 2000; 283: 373-380
- Interactions between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry.Can Med Assoc J. 1993; 149: 1401-1407
- Effects of an educational intervention on residents’ knowledge and attitudes toward interactions with pharmaceutical representatives.J Gen Intern Med. 1997; 12: 639-642
- Attitudes of internal medicine faculty and residents toward professional interaction with pharmaceutical sales representatives.JAMA. 1990; 264: 1693-1697
- Beliefs and practices of emergency medicine faculty and residents regarding professional interactions with the biomedical industry.Ann Emerg Med. 1993; 22: 1576-1581
- The effect on resident attitudes of regulatory policies regarding pharmaceutical representative activities.J Gen Intern Med. 1993; 8: 130-134
- Interactions with the pharmaceutical industry.Can Med Assoc J. 1995; 153: 553-559
- Interactions with the pharmaceutical industry.Can Med Assoc J. 1996; 155: 1243-1248
- Pharmaceutical representatives and emergency medicine residents.Ann Emerg Med. 1993; 22: 1593-1596
- A comparison of physicians’ and patients’ attitudes toward pharmaceutical industry gifts.J Gen Intern Med. 1998; 13: 151-154
- Physicians, pharmaceutical sales representatives, and the cost of prescribing.Arch Fam Med. 1996; 5: 201-206
- The gift relationship between pharmaceutical companies and physicians.J Clin Pharm Ther. 1997; 22: 207-215
- Patient’s attitudes about gifts to physicians from pharmaceutical companies.J Am Board Fam Pract. 1995; 8: 457-464
- Doctors, drug companies, and gifts.JAMA. 1989; 262: 3448-3451
- Physicians’ behavior and their interactions with drug companies. A controlled study of physicians who requested additions to a hospital drug formulary.JAMA. 1994; 271: 684-689
- The effects of pharmaceutical firm enticements on physician prescribing patterns. There’s no such thing as a free lunch.Chest. 1992; 102: 270-273
- Pharmaceutical representatives in academic medical centers.J Gen Intern Med. 1990; 5: 240-243
- Scientific versus commercial sources of influence on the prescribing behavior of physicians.Am J Med. 1982; 73: 4-8
- Impact of pharmaceutical company representatives on internal medicine residency programs. A survey of residency program directors.. Arch Intern Med. 1992; 152: 1009-1013
- Pharmaceutical policies in Canadian family medicine training. Survey of residency programs.. Can Fam Phys. 1997; 43: 1947-1951
- Development of residency program guidelines for interaction with the pharmaceutical industry.Can Med Assoc J. 1993; 149: 405-408
Article info
Publication history
Accepted:
February 1,
2001
Footnotes
☆Supported in part by a residency training grant from the Health Resources and Services Administration, Grant 5 D28 HP 19179–18, and the Resource Centers for Minority Aging research program of the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute of Nursing, and the Office of Research on Minority Health, National Institutes of Health, Grant 1 P30 AG15272. Dr. Shlipak is funded by a research career development award from the Health Services Research and Development division of the Department of Veterans Affairs. No other external funding supported this research project. This paper was delivered as an oral presentation at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting, Boston, May 2000.
Identification
Copyright
© 2001 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
