Cargando…

Comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four UK countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis

OBJECTIVES: To examine the characteristics of pharmaceutical payments to healthcare and patient organisations in the four UK countries. Compare companies spending the most; types of organisations receiving payments and types of payments in the four countries. Measure the extent to which companies ta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rickard, Emily, Carmel, Emma, Ozieranski, Piotr
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10069501/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36990486
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061591
_version_ 1785018860230934528
author Rickard, Emily
Carmel, Emma
Ozieranski, Piotr
author_facet Rickard, Emily
Carmel, Emma
Ozieranski, Piotr
author_sort Rickard, Emily
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To examine the characteristics of pharmaceutical payments to healthcare and patient organisations in the four UK countries. Compare companies spending the most; types of organisations receiving payments and types of payments in the four countries. Measure the extent to which companies target payments at the same recipients in each country and whether it differs depending on the type of recipient. DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparative and social network analysis. SETTING: England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: 100 donors (pharmaceutical companies) reporting payments to 4229 recipients (healthcare organisations and patient organisations) in 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each country: payment totals and distribution; average number of common recipients between companies; share of payments to organisations fulfilling different roles in the health ecosystem and payments for different activities. RESULTS: Companies prioritised different types of recipient and different types of activity in each country. There were significant differences in the distribution of payments across the four countries, even for similar types of recipients. Recipients in England and Wales received smaller individual payments than in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Overall, targeting shared recipients occurred most frequently in England, but was also common in certain pockets of each country’s health ecosystem. We found evidence of reporting errors in Disclosure UK. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest a strategic approach to payments tailored to countries’ policy and decision-making context, indicating there may be specific vulnerabilities to financial conflicts of interest at subnational level. Payment differences between countries may be occurring in other countries, particularly those with decentralised health systems and/or high levels of independence across its decision-making authorities. We call for a single database containing all recipient types, full location details and published with associated descriptive and network statistics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10069501
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100695012023-04-04 Comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four UK countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis Rickard, Emily Carmel, Emma Ozieranski, Piotr BMJ Open Health Policy OBJECTIVES: To examine the characteristics of pharmaceutical payments to healthcare and patient organisations in the four UK countries. Compare companies spending the most; types of organisations receiving payments and types of payments in the four countries. Measure the extent to which companies target payments at the same recipients in each country and whether it differs depending on the type of recipient. DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparative and social network analysis. SETTING: England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: 100 donors (pharmaceutical companies) reporting payments to 4229 recipients (healthcare organisations and patient organisations) in 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each country: payment totals and distribution; average number of common recipients between companies; share of payments to organisations fulfilling different roles in the health ecosystem and payments for different activities. RESULTS: Companies prioritised different types of recipient and different types of activity in each country. There were significant differences in the distribution of payments across the four countries, even for similar types of recipients. Recipients in England and Wales received smaller individual payments than in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Overall, targeting shared recipients occurred most frequently in England, but was also common in certain pockets of each country’s health ecosystem. We found evidence of reporting errors in Disclosure UK. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest a strategic approach to payments tailored to countries’ policy and decision-making context, indicating there may be specific vulnerabilities to financial conflicts of interest at subnational level. Payment differences between countries may be occurring in other countries, particularly those with decentralised health systems and/or high levels of independence across its decision-making authorities. We call for a single database containing all recipient types, full location details and published with associated descriptive and network statistics. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10069501/ /pubmed/36990486 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061591 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Health Policy
Rickard, Emily
Carmel, Emma
Ozieranski, Piotr
Comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four UK countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis
title Comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four UK countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis
title_full Comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four UK countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis
title_fullStr Comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four UK countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four UK countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis
title_short Comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four UK countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis
title_sort comparing pharmaceutical company payments in the four uk countries: a cross-sectional and social network analysis
topic Health Policy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10069501/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36990486
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061591
work_keys_str_mv AT rickardemily comparingpharmaceuticalcompanypaymentsinthefourukcountriesacrosssectionalandsocialnetworkanalysis
AT carmelemma comparingpharmaceuticalcompanypaymentsinthefourukcountriesacrosssectionalandsocialnetworkanalysis
AT ozieranskipiotr comparingpharmaceuticalcompanypaymentsinthefourukcountriesacrosssectionalandsocialnetworkanalysis