A Medical School Looks To Ban Speaking Fees

Hoping to bolster its reputation, the Oregon Health & Science University School of Medicine plans to recommend that researchers should no longer accept paid speaking fees from drugmakers. The proposal is expected to approved in about two months, although it has drawn criticism from some staff members who received lucrative compensation, The Oregonian reports.

The move comes a few months after the school received a positive, but qualified grade on the most recent American Medical Student Association annual report card that tracks medical school policies toward financial dealings with the pharmaceutical industry. The AMSA noted that the OHSU med school policy is deficient by failing to prohibit participation in speakers bureaus (see this).

"I think there's a conflict-of-interest potential there that we should just eliminate, so nobody has to think about it," OHSU School of Medicine dean Mark Richardson, who asked an advisory committee to examine the issue last spring, tells the paper. Some staff make upwards of $50,000 annually as members of speakers bureaus, the paper notes.

The decision reflects a growing willingness among medical schools to distance their institutions from policies that may unduly influence medical education, research and practice. Over the past couple of years, various medical schools have tightened or adopted policies to limit industry influence or the perception of conflicts of interest.

Last March, the AMSA issued its most recent scorecard and found that 102 medical schools out of a total of 152 – or 67 percent – were given a grade of A or B for policies governing interactions between drugmakers, faculty and students. And of the 152 medical schools tracked, 17 have policies restricting speaker bureau fees (back story).

The issue has taken on greater urgency as the Sunshine provision of the Affordable Care Act goes into effect next year. The law requires drugmakers to post payments exceeding $10 to physicians on their web sites, among other things. However, the federal government has not yet issued a final rule for gathering and publishing the data.

At OSHU, the new proposal is meeting with mixed reactions. For instance, Susan Tolle, director of the Center for Ethics in Health Care at the university, applauded the move. "The students are right about speakers' bureaus," she tells The Oregonian. "I would like us to live up to that standard." But assistant professor of medicine Pritham Raj disagrees.

That saddens me," he tells the paper, adding that if qualified OHSU faculty members do not educate other healthcare providers, less-qualified doctors will. "I give a lot of lectures. I educate my peers. That's what I love to do and I think there's no greater honor," he says. "I'm not trying to bamboozle anybody."

Similarly OHSU lung cancer specialists Alan Sandler maintains that his integrity was compromised by accepting speaker fees, but that the goal was education. "There is a crying need to get information out to doctors," he tells the paper.

Both physicians earned sizeable speaking fees from drugmakers over the past two years. Sandler received more than $88,000 from Eli Lilly and GlaxoSmithKline for speaking engagements in 2010 and early 2011, the ProPublica database shows (look here). And Raj received more than $105,000 from AstraZeneca during 2010 and early 2011, (see this).

doc pic thx to jerome kassirer

8 Comments

Nov 26, 2012 - 8:20am
I would not stay awake nights worrying about what trhe AMSA says. Better they should turn their attention inward and ask the question why are they being ripped off to the tune of $300,000 or more in some schools to pay for four years of med school.
Nov 26, 2012 - 4:49pm
The docs who "love to educate their peers" can certainly continue to do so, on their own dime. Good for the medical students for keeping score and good for Oregon if they follow through!
Nov 26, 2012 - 6:14pm
The doctors who love to educate their peers are full of crap. What they love is Money. Period. Speaking engagements for Pharma companies are paid-for promotional talks about one product. If these doctors want to "educate" then they can work with CME providers. Some of those are also corrupt. The single-company single-product CME programs are not independent and everyone knows it (except maybe the FDA that remains clueless). However, there are still some serious CME programs that discuss the many different treatment options and evolving science in a fair and independent manner. If you want to educate your peers, that is where you can do it. Pharma Speaking programs are PROMOTIONAL PROGRAMS. You are not receiving your $100,000 paychecks from pharma to educate, it is to promote. You can keep trying to sell your educational story but at least in Oregon they are finally willing to stand up to the greed and face the facts. I applaud their leadership.
Nov 26, 2012 - 7:11pm
When I was a post doc my boss, a Division Chairman, no less brought in tens of thousands of dollars per year to the medical school hawking ulcer pills for vsrious pharma companies. He even went on a popular daytime talk show to sell the stuff.

The guy was a cash cow for the school. Are these schools swimming in dough that they would disincentivize such behavior? Hardly.

My boss should get three cheers, not a slap on the wrist. Besides he was powerful enough to tell those pinheads to take a long walk off a short pier and make it stick.

Nov 26, 2012 - 7:22pm
Yawn… the docs who “love to educate their peers” rationalize away their conflict of interest with self deception. The rest of us see them as hypocrites when they themselves cannot. Sociobiologists like Robert Trivers spelled it out long ago: if you want to deceive others it is very useful first to have deceived yourself – that way you will better mask the signs of deception. If you have ever been in the presence of a moralizing KOL you will know what I am saying. But when the moralizing KOLs get to run the academic departments and the professional societies and the scientific journals then we know our field is in trouble. Good for OHSU, I say.

I did my share of sponsored talks in years past but that was when we had freedom to use our own material. Once the word came down that we had to stay on company script and company slides then I quit (see PubMed ID 18632707).

Nov 27, 2012 - 4:10pm
I agree with Dr Carroll 100%.

By now it's actually comical to read the comments above from the doctors who want to keep getting paid.

Nov 27, 2012 - 8:15pm
Yes, Dr Carroll. But did you know how to used animated Powerpoint, with those cute little cartoon characters whizzing in and out of the screen like Wiley Coyote?

Here's a tutorial. It's very cool, keeps your audience awake. Try it out at the next ACNP meeting.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Powerpoint+2010+Animation+Tutorial&view=detail&mid=FAF6C887C72623BED174FAF6C887C72623BED174&first=0

Nov 28, 2012 - 10:39am
Thanks oii...LOL... I have given ACNP some issues to chew on but I won't be there this year.