Journal of vascular surgery
-
The interaction between pharmaceutical and device companies and hospitals and physicians has undergone significant transformation in the past few years due to the public's perception that bias may result when such relationships are not disclosed and monitored. Policies need to be written by medical centers and hospitals to preserve and retain the trust of the public. The policy written by Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions is outlined and its implications discussed in this article. The importance of such policies in guiding young faculty and staff as they begin their careers cannot be overemphasized.
-
Relationships between physicians and their industry partners have ranged from spectacular collaborations that produce extraordinary advances in patient care, such as endovascular aneurysm repair, to humiliating scandals such as extravagant trips and bogus "consulting" agreements resulting in legal actions. It is the latter which have led many to call for the end of all physician-industry relationships, and the former which mandate their preservation. While these two examples are representative of extremes at each end of the spectrum of this issue, in reality the majority of physician-industry relationships are far more complex, and the line between appropriate and inappropriate, and ethical and unethical, is hard to draw. ⋯ While it is clear that free trips are not within the realm of proper interaction, what about unrestricted educational grants to institutions, or support of CME activities, professional society meetings, and new device training? As a result of the intense scrutiny of relationships between physicians and industry recently, multiple diverse entities (Association of American Medical Colleges, American Medical Association, Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education, professional medical associations, academic medical centers, industry, and government) have generated guidelines and policies with very different perspectives, reflective of their different missions. These policies range from vague and lenient, with only basic limitation of the physician-industry relationship, to extremely rigid and strict, with only minimal interaction and mission support permitted. Given the many changes in oversight and expectations for the relationship between physicians and industry, it is important for vascular surgeons to be aware of the background behind these modifications, the evidence that they are needed, and the positions of the diverse organizations and institutions that have already defined their policies on this issue.
-
Guideline
The new CMSS code for interactions with companies managing relationships to minimize conflicts.
Conflicts of interest in medicine have received significant attention in recent years, through the public and professional media, federal and state governments, and through a 2009 report of the Institute of Medicine on Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education and Practice. The Council of Medical Specialty Societies (CMSS) Code for Interactions with Companies was adopted by the CMSS in April 2010. The Code guides specialty societies in the profession of medicine in ethical relationships between societies and the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. The Code serves to protect and promote the independence of specialty societies and their leaders in corporate sponsorships, licensing, advertising, society meetings, exhibits, educational programs, journals, clinical practice guidelines, and research.
-
Comparative Study
Cognitive changes after surgery vs stenting for carotid artery stenosis.
Cognitive function has not been evaluated systematically in the context of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) versus carotid artery stenting (CAS). Cognitive decline can occur from microembolization or hypoperfusion during CEA or CAS. Carotid revascularization may, however, also improve cognitive dysfunction resulting from chronic hypoperfusion. We compared cognitive outcomes in consecutive asymptomatic patients undergoing CAS or CEA. ⋯ Carotid revascularization results in an overall improvement in cognitive function. There are no differences in the composite scores of five major cognitive domains between CEA and CAS. When individual tests are compared, CEA results in a reduction in memory, while CAS patients show reduced psychomotor speed. Larger studies will help confirm these findings.
-
Comparative Study
Early results of the Endurant endograft system in patients with friendly and hostile infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm anatomy.
To evaluate and compare the outcome after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) with the newly released Endurant endograft system in patients with different aortoiliac anatomic characteristics. ⋯ Early (12 months) results suggest similar clinical performance of the Endurant stent graft system in endovascular treatment of AAAs with friendly and hostile anatomies, however, demonstrating more intra- and perioperative adversities for the last group. Larger prospective studies or even randomized trials comparing different new generation graft models are required to evaluate the comparable long-term results and possible expansion of EVAR indications for this specific endograft in adverse anatomies.