Patients reasonably trust their physicians to make decisions on their care in the best interest of their patients, and irrespective of their own financial interests. Yet research has shown that payments, consulting fees, trips and other perks made available to doctors by makers of drugs and medical devices do influence the decisions of some doctors, and may sometimes encourage the use of more expensive medicines and devices. To reduce the potential for abuse, the Obama administration has proposed to institute rules called for under bipartisan legislation to require companies and organizations that make such payments to post them on an easily understandable Web site, and to identify the recipient physicians.
Consumer advocates long have lobbied for such disclosure, and with good reason. Approximately a fourth of all doctors receive cash payments from manufacturers of medical drugs and devices, data analyzed by The New York Times found, and around two-thirds of doctors routinely accept gifts of food for their staffs and/or dinners. Such gifts are often accompanied by drug samples and, in some cases, financial incentives to physicians to prescribe specific drugs and devices.
The data further showed that a significant number of physicians receive substantial payments, from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars, for speaking, writing and consulting fees, The Times found.
Under the new rule, passed with bipartisan support under the Obama administration’s health care reform bill, the new standard will be applicable if a company has just one product that is covered by Medicare or Medicaid. Companies would be required to disclose all payments they make to doctors and the services they cover. The government, in turn, would list all reportable information on a public Web site that could be easily located and understood.
Predictably, a spokesman for the Advanced Medical Technology Association told The Times his group feared that such disclosure could be used by law enforcement agencies, attorneys and whistle blowers. He said that could prompt physicians to refuse payments and work for drug and device makers, chilling research and innovation.
Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, of Iowa, a sponsor of the law, correctly dismissed that argument. He said the law’s purpose was to provide transparency and full disclosure, not to make a judgment on the validity of such payments and doctors’ acceptance of them. “The goal,” he said, “is to let the sun shine in and make information available to foster accountability.”
Given the cost of health care and patients’ interest, that’s a worthy goal.