Japanese physicians' perceptions of conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies: Estimating two different questioning approaches

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES International Journal of Health Planning and Management Pub Date : 2024-01-03 DOI:10.1002/hpm.3748
Hiroaki Saito, Akihiko Ozaki, Michio Murakami, Yoshitake Takebayashi
{"title":"Japanese physicians' perceptions of conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies: Estimating two different questioning approaches","authors":"Hiroaki Saito,&nbsp;Akihiko Ozaki,&nbsp;Michio Murakami,&nbsp;Yoshitake Takebayashi","doi":"10.1002/hpm.3748","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Despite being one of the world's largest pharmaceutical markets, interactions between Japanese physicians and pharmaceutical companies often remain opaque. Importantly, potential conflicts of interest associated with these interactions can compromise patient care and increase costs. We conducted an online survey of Japanese physicians to elucidate perspectives on pharmaceutical company promotional activities and how these influence physician prescribing patterns. Anticipating that physicians might downplay their reliance on, or the value of, pharmaceutical company-provided information, the survey incorporated a direct questioning method and an unmatched count technique (UCT) to identify hidden perceptions on factors likely to influence prescribing. Overall, 1080 eligible physicians participated. Of these, 105 (9.7%) self-identified as hospital directors or managers. Surprisingly, nearly twice as many participants responding to direct questioning (18.9%) versus those responding to the UCT (10.1%) asserted that information provided by pharmaceutical companies was important when prescribing medicine. Hospital directors or managers (adjusted odds ratio [adjOR] 2.56, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.00–6.54, reference = physician without title) and frequent interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives (adjOR 5.96, 95% CI: 1.88–18.9, reference = rare interaction) significantly valued the information from sales representatives and sponsored lectures when considering prescribing decisions. Additionally, 77.1% of respondents believed that sales representatives provide fair, neutral, or relatively honest and unbiased information about their products. Few Japanese physicians acknowledged the influence of industry-provided information on prescribing patterns. Our study uniquely applies two distinct question formats, providing a novel approach to understanding the depth of physician-industry relationships and the effectiveness of various survey methodologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":47637,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Planning and Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Planning and Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hpm.3748","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite being one of the world's largest pharmaceutical markets, interactions between Japanese physicians and pharmaceutical companies often remain opaque. Importantly, potential conflicts of interest associated with these interactions can compromise patient care and increase costs. We conducted an online survey of Japanese physicians to elucidate perspectives on pharmaceutical company promotional activities and how these influence physician prescribing patterns. Anticipating that physicians might downplay their reliance on, or the value of, pharmaceutical company-provided information, the survey incorporated a direct questioning method and an unmatched count technique (UCT) to identify hidden perceptions on factors likely to influence prescribing. Overall, 1080 eligible physicians participated. Of these, 105 (9.7%) self-identified as hospital directors or managers. Surprisingly, nearly twice as many participants responding to direct questioning (18.9%) versus those responding to the UCT (10.1%) asserted that information provided by pharmaceutical companies was important when prescribing medicine. Hospital directors or managers (adjusted odds ratio [adjOR] 2.56, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.00–6.54, reference = physician without title) and frequent interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives (adjOR 5.96, 95% CI: 1.88–18.9, reference = rare interaction) significantly valued the information from sales representatives and sponsored lectures when considering prescribing decisions. Additionally, 77.1% of respondents believed that sales representatives provide fair, neutral, or relatively honest and unbiased information about their products. Few Japanese physicians acknowledged the influence of industry-provided information on prescribing patterns. Our study uniquely applies two distinct question formats, providing a novel approach to understanding the depth of physician-industry relationships and the effectiveness of various survey methodologies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
日本医生对与制药公司利益冲突的看法:估算两种不同的提问方式。
尽管日本是世界上最大的医药市场之一,但日本医生与制药公司之间的互动往往仍不透明。重要的是,与这些互动相关的潜在利益冲突可能会影响患者护理并增加成本。我们对日本医生进行了在线调查,以阐明他们对制药公司促销活动的看法以及这些活动如何影响医生的处方模式。考虑到医生可能会淡化他们对制药公司提供的信息的依赖性或价值,我们在调查中采用了直接提问法和非匹配计数法(UCT),以确定医生对可能影响处方的因素的隐性看法。共有 1080 名符合条件的医生参与了调查。其中 105 人(9.7%)自称是医院院长或经理。令人惊讶的是,回答直接提问的参与者(18.9%)与回答 UCT 的参与者(10.1%)相比,有近两倍的人声称制药公司提供的信息在处方用药时非常重要。医院院长或经理(调整后的几率比 [adjOR] 2.56,95% 置信区间 [95%CI]:1.00-6.54,参考值:1.00-6.541.00-6.54,参考 = 无职称的医生)和与医药销售代表频繁互动(adjOR 5.96,95% 置信区间 [95%CI]:1.88-18.9,参考 = 很少互动)的人在考虑处方决定时非常重视销售代表和赞助讲座提供的信息。此外,77.1% 的受访者认为销售代表提供了公平、中立或相对诚实公正的产品信息。很少有日本医生承认行业提供的信息对处方模式有影响。我们的研究独特地采用了两种不同的问题形式,为了解医生与行业关系的深度以及各种调查方法的有效性提供了一种新方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
197
期刊介绍: Policy making and implementation, planning and management are widely recognized as central to effective health systems and services and to better health. Globalization, and the economic circumstances facing groups of countries worldwide, meanwhile present a great challenge for health planning and management. The aim of this quarterly journal is to offer a forum for publications which direct attention to major issues in health policy, planning and management. The intention is to maintain a balance between theory and practice, from a variety of disciplines, fields and perspectives. The Journal is explicitly international and multidisciplinary in scope and appeal: articles about policy, planning and management in countries at various stages of political, social, cultural and economic development are welcomed, as are those directed at the different levels (national, regional, local) of the health sector. Manuscripts are invited from a spectrum of different disciplines e.g., (the social sciences, management and medicine) as long as they advance our knowledge and understanding of the health sector. The Journal is therefore global, and eclectic.
期刊最新文献
Voluntary private health insurance and cancer screening utilisation in Europe. Issue Information Reassessing physician interactions with pharmaceutical companies: A response to Murayama et al. and analysis of survey discrepancies. The experiences of minority language users in health and social care research: A systematic review. Steering them softly with a quality label? A case study analysis of a patient channelling strategy without financial incentives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1