IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0175493.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Association between physicians’ interaction with pharmaceutical companies and their clinical practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Hneine Brax
  • Racha Fadlallah
  • Lina Al-Khaled
  • Lara A Kahale
  • Hala Nas
  • Fadi El-Jardali
  • Elie A Akl

Abstract

Background: Pharmaceutical company representatives likely influence the prescribing habits and professional behaviors of physicians. The objective of this study was to systematically review the association between physicians’ interactions with pharmaceutical companies and their clinical practices. Methods: We used the standard systematic review methodology. Observational and experimental study designs examining any type of targeted interaction between practicing physicians and pharmaceutical companies were eligible. The search strategy included a search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases up to July 2016. Two reviewers selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate and independently. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. Results: Twenty articles reporting on 19 studies met our inclusion criteria. All of these studies were conducted in high-income countries and examined different types of interactions, including detailing, industry-funded continuing medical education, and receiving free gifts. While all included studies assessed prescribing behaviors, four studies also assessed financial outcomes, one assessed physicians’ knowledge, and one assessed their beliefs. None of the studies assessed clinical outcomes. Out of the 19 studies, 15 found a consistent association between interactions promoting a medication, and inappropriately increased prescribing rates, lower prescribing quality, and/or increased prescribing costs. The remaining four studies found both associations and lack of significant associations for the different types of exposures and drugs examined in the studies. A meta-analysis of six of these studies found a statistically significant association between exposure and physicians’ prescribing behaviors (OR = 2.52; 95% CI 1.82–3.50). The quality of evidence was downgraded to moderate for risk of bias and inconsistency. Sensitivity analysis excluding studies at high risk of bias did not substantially change these results. A subgroup analysis did not find a difference by type of exposure. Conclusion: There is moderate quality evidence that physicians’ interactions with pharmaceutical companies are associated with their prescribing patterns and quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Hneine Brax & Racha Fadlallah & Lina Al-Khaled & Lara A Kahale & Hala Nas & Fadi El-Jardali & Elie A Akl, 2017. "Association between physicians’ interaction with pharmaceutical companies and their clinical practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-28, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0175493
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175493
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175493
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175493&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0175493?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klaus Lieb & Armin Scheurich, 2014. "Contact between Doctors and the Pharmaceutical Industry, Their Perceptions, and the Effects on Prescribing Habits," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-8, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ansari, Bahareh, 2021. "Industry payments and physicians prescriptions: Effect of a payment restriction policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    2. Moriarty, Frank & Larkin, James & Fahey, Tom, 2021. "Payments reported by the pharmaceutical industry in Ireland from 2015 to 2019: An observational study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(10), pages 1297-1304.
    3. Anju Murayama & Yuki Senoo & Kayo Harada & Yasuhiro Kotera & Hiroaki Saito & Toyoaki Sawano & Yosuke Suzuki & Tetsuya Tanimoto & Akihiko Ozaki, 2022. "Awareness and Perceptions among Members of a Japanese Cancer Patient Advocacy Group Concerning the Financial Relationships between the Pharmaceutical Industry and Physicians," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-24, March.
    4. Light, Donald W. & Lexchin, Joel R., 2021. "Pharmaceuticals as a market for “lemons”: Theory and practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 268(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marta Makowska & Lukasz Jasinski, 2017. "Znaczenie „przejrzystosci” w relacjach lekarzy z firmami farmaceutycznymi / The Importance of ‘Disclosure’ in Relationships between Physicians and Pharmaceutical Companies," Annales. Ethics in Economic Life, University of Lodz, Faculty of Economics and Sociology, vol. 20(1), pages 95-109, February.
    2. Elgiz Yılmaz Altuntaş & Esin Cumhur Yalçın, 2023. "COVID-19 Pandemic Learning: The Uprising of Remote Detailing in Pharmaceutical Sector Using Sales Force Automation and Its Sustainable Impact on Continuing Medical Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-29, June.
    3. Jelena Grujić & Slobodan Morača & Angela Fajsi, 2020. "Analysis of Risk Factors in the Channels of Drug Distribution: Professional Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Anna Machowska & Cecilia Stålsby Lundborg, 2018. "Drivers of Irrational Use of Antibiotics in Europe," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-14, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0175493. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.