Influence of pharmaceutical marketing on Medicare prescriptions in the District of Columbia

Abstract

ImportanceGifts from pharmaceutical companies are believed to influence prescribing behavior, but few studies have addressed the association between industry gifts to physicians and drug costs, prescription volume, or preference for generic drugs. Even less research addresses the effect of gifts on the prescribing behavior of nurse practitioners (NPs), physician assistants (PAs), and podiatrists.ObjectiveTo analyze the association between gifts provided by pharmaceutical companies to individual prescribers in Washington DC and the number of prescriptions, cost of prescriptions, and proportion of branded prescriptions for each prescriber.DesignGifts data from the District of Columbia’s (DC) AccessRx program and the federal Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Open Payments program were analyzed with claims data from the CMS 2013 Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data.SettingWashington DC, 2013ParticipantsPhysicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, podiatrists, and other licensed Medicare Part D prescribers who participated in Medicare Part D (a Federal prescription drug program that covers patients over age 65 or who are disabled).Exposure(s)Gifts to healthcare prescribers (including cash, meals, and ownership interests) from pharmaceutical companies.Main outcomes and measuresAverage number of Medicare Part D claims per prescriber, number of claims per patient, cost per claim, and proportion of branded claims.ResultsIn 2013, 1,122 (39.1%) of 2,873 Medicare Part D prescribers received gifts from pharmaceutical companies totaling $3.9 million in 2013. Compared to non-gift recipients, gift recipients prescribed 2.3 more claims per patient, prescribed medications costing $50 more per claim, and prescribed 7.8% more branded drugs. In six specialties (General Internal Medicine, Family Medicine, Obstetrics/Gynecology, Urology, Ophthalmology, and Dermatology), gifts were associated with a significantly increased average cost of claims. For Internal Medicine, Family Medicine, and Ophthalmology, gifts were associated with more branded claims. Gift acceptance was associated with increased average cost per claim for PAs and NPs. Gift acceptance was also associated with higher proportion of branded claims for PAs but not NPs. Physicians who received small gifts (less than $500 annually) had more expensive claims ($114 vs. $85) and more branded claims (30.3% vs. 25.7%) than physicians who received no gifts. Those receiving large gifts (greater than $500 annually) had the highest average costs per claim ($189) and branded claims (39.9%) than other groups. All differences were statistically significant (p<0.05).Conclusions and relevanceGifts from pharmaceutical companies are associated with more prescriptions per patient, more costly prescriptions, and a higher proportion of branded prescriptions with variation across specialties. Gifts of any size had an effect and larger gifts elicited a larger impact on prescribing behaviors. Our study confirms and expands on previous work showing that industry gi...

Drug and therapeutics committees as guardians of safe and rational medicines use

“…It is clear that substantial sums are spent on marketing: $17 700m on medical marketing in 1997, which rose to $20 900m in 2016 . Marketing is not always constrained by ethics or self‐regulation: between 2003 and 2012, there were 74 cases of off‐label promotion in the United Kingdom, and 43 companies were ruled in breach of the relevant regulation at least once . It is also clear that prescribers are influenced by such marketing.…”

Financial ties between authors of the clinical practice guidelines and pharmaceutical companies: an example from Japan

“…To the best of our knowledge no previous study has analysed the financial relationships of clinical practice guideline committee members of infectious diseases, and this study revealed for the first time that manufacturers of anti-MRSA drugs made large payments to Japanese MRSA clinical practice guidelines authors, totalling nearly V240 000. Such financial ties should raise concerns, considering the current perception of appropriate relationships between physicians and the industrial companies, because several researchers have reported that financial conflicts of interest contribute to promotion of specific drugs, and affect the physicians' prescription decisions [2,17]. Unlike the other 40 companies, these five anti-MRSA drug companies paid particularly for speaking.…”

Competing and conflicting interests in the care of critically ill patients

“…Interactions with the pharmaceutical and device manufacturers in particular may give rise to cognitive biases regarding use of relevant pharmaceuticals and devices. [63, 64] Physicians should actively avoid, and be protected from, exposure to direct and indirect marketing efforts of drug and device manufacturers.…”