In a BMJ “briefing” Rebecca Coombes sums up the new UK system for public disclosure of payments from drug companies to doctors
Published the 2nd January 2015 in The BMJ, here follows the full article:
I have met Andrew Powrie-Smith of the ABPI several times. He has made it a personal mission to improve transparency for the Pharmaceutical Industry and I applaud his efforts. My concern is that the medical profession may not yet quite agree with Powrie-Smith that transparency is a “societal expectation”. I say this as (1) the voluntary register Who pays this doctor? has not exactly been burdened with declarations, and (2) my research into Registers of interest for all staff employed in NHS Scotland has evidenced very poor compliance with Scottish Government Guidance (HDL 62).
The new database, set up by the ABPI, is a most positive development. We should however be aware that it only applies to the pharmaceutical industry and not other areas of commerce: such as device makers, nutritional supplements, digital technologies etc. It is my understanding that the ABPI Register also only applies to doctors. Do we not also need to consider academics, managers, commissioners, pharmacists, nurses, AHPs, charities all of whom could be paid to “educate” us about a specific condition and a product or test for this. Or to commission a service for it.
Surely however, the main issue with this new ABPI code is that it has no legal underpinning. Doctors can opt out of declaring any financial payments and they so they will not be named.
This is why I have petitioned the Scottish Government for a Sunshine Act (or clause). America has this legislation as do several other countries.
One Reply to “What happens when a doctor opts out?”
Reblogged this on Chrys Muirhead .