Cargando…

A cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016

OBJECTIVE: We set out to document how NHS trusts in the UK record and share disclosures of conflict of interest by their employees. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of responses to a Freedom of Information Act request for Gifts and Hospitality Registers. SETTING: NHS Trusts (secondary/tertiary care org...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Feldman, Harriet Ruth, DeVito, Nicholas J, Mendel, Jonathan, Carroll, David E, Goldacre, Ben
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5875639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29581205
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019952
_version_ 1783310388167704576
author Feldman, Harriet Ruth
DeVito, Nicholas J
Mendel, Jonathan
Carroll, David E
Goldacre, Ben
author_facet Feldman, Harriet Ruth
DeVito, Nicholas J
Mendel, Jonathan
Carroll, David E
Goldacre, Ben
author_sort Feldman, Harriet Ruth
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We set out to document how NHS trusts in the UK record and share disclosures of conflict of interest by their employees. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of responses to a Freedom of Information Act request for Gifts and Hospitality Registers. SETTING: NHS Trusts (secondary/tertiary care organisations) in England. PARTICIPANTS: 236 Trusts were contacted, of which 217 responded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed all disclosures for completeness and openness, scoring them for achieving each of five measures of transparency. RESULTS: 185 Trusts (78%) provided a register. 71 Trusts did not respond within the 28 day time limit required by the FoIA. Most COI registers were incomplete by design, and did not contain the information necessary to assess conflicts of interest. 126/185 (68%) did not record the names of recipients. 47/185 (25%) did not record the cash value of the gift or hospitality. Only 31/185 registers (16%) contained the names of recipients, the names of donors, and the cash amounts received. 18/185 (10%) contained none of: recipient name, donor name, and cash amount. Only 15 Trusts had their disclosure register publicly available online (6%). We generated a transparency index assessing whether each Trust met the following criteria: responded on time; provided a register; had a register with fields identifying donor, recipient, and cash amount; provided a register in a format that allowed further analysis; and had their register publicly available online. Mean attainment was 1.9/5; no NHS trust met all five criteria. CONCLUSION: Overall, recording of employees’ conflicts of interest by NHS trusts is poor. None of the NHS Trusts in England met all transparency criteria. 19 did not respond to our FoIA requests, 51 did not provide a Gifts and Hospitality Register and only 31 of the registers provided contained enough information to assess employees’ conflicts of interest. Despite obligations on healthcare professionals to disclose conflicts of interest, and on organisations to record these, the current system for logging and tracking such disclosures is not functioning adequately. We propose a simple national template for reporting conflicts of interest, modelled on the US ‘Sunshine Act’.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5875639
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58756392018-04-02 A cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016 Feldman, Harriet Ruth DeVito, Nicholas J Mendel, Jonathan Carroll, David E Goldacre, Ben BMJ Open Health Policy OBJECTIVE: We set out to document how NHS trusts in the UK record and share disclosures of conflict of interest by their employees. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of responses to a Freedom of Information Act request for Gifts and Hospitality Registers. SETTING: NHS Trusts (secondary/tertiary care organisations) in England. PARTICIPANTS: 236 Trusts were contacted, of which 217 responded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed all disclosures for completeness and openness, scoring them for achieving each of five measures of transparency. RESULTS: 185 Trusts (78%) provided a register. 71 Trusts did not respond within the 28 day time limit required by the FoIA. Most COI registers were incomplete by design, and did not contain the information necessary to assess conflicts of interest. 126/185 (68%) did not record the names of recipients. 47/185 (25%) did not record the cash value of the gift or hospitality. Only 31/185 registers (16%) contained the names of recipients, the names of donors, and the cash amounts received. 18/185 (10%) contained none of: recipient name, donor name, and cash amount. Only 15 Trusts had their disclosure register publicly available online (6%). We generated a transparency index assessing whether each Trust met the following criteria: responded on time; provided a register; had a register with fields identifying donor, recipient, and cash amount; provided a register in a format that allowed further analysis; and had their register publicly available online. Mean attainment was 1.9/5; no NHS trust met all five criteria. CONCLUSION: Overall, recording of employees’ conflicts of interest by NHS trusts is poor. None of the NHS Trusts in England met all transparency criteria. 19 did not respond to our FoIA requests, 51 did not provide a Gifts and Hospitality Register and only 31 of the registers provided contained enough information to assess employees’ conflicts of interest. Despite obligations on healthcare professionals to disclose conflicts of interest, and on organisations to record these, the current system for logging and tracking such disclosures is not functioning adequately. We propose a simple national template for reporting conflicts of interest, modelled on the US ‘Sunshine Act’. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5875639/ /pubmed/29581205 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019952 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Health Policy
Feldman, Harriet Ruth
DeVito, Nicholas J
Mendel, Jonathan
Carroll, David E
Goldacre, Ben
A cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016
title A cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016
title_full A cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016
title_fullStr A cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016
title_full_unstemmed A cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016
title_short A cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to NHS hospital employers in England 2015-2016
title_sort cross-sectional study of all clinicians’ conflict of interest disclosures to nhs hospital employers in england 2015-2016
topic Health Policy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5875639/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29581205
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019952
work_keys_str_mv AT feldmanharrietruth acrosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016
AT devitonicholasj acrosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016
AT mendeljonathan acrosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016
AT carrolldavide acrosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016
AT goldacreben acrosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016
AT feldmanharrietruth crosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016
AT devitonicholasj crosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016
AT mendeljonathan crosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016
AT carrolldavide crosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016
AT goldacreben crosssectionalstudyofallcliniciansconflictofinterestdisclosurestonhshospitalemployersinengland20152016