Reconciling a "pleasant exchange" with evidence of information bias: A three-country study on pharmaceutical sales visits in primary care

Ellen Reynolds, Line Guénette, Joel Lexchin, Alan Cassels, Michael S Wilkes, Geneviève Durrieu, Marie Dominique Beaulieu, Barbara Mintzes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To examine and compare the experiences and attitudes of primary care physicians in three different regulatory environments (United States, Canada, and France) towards interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives, particularly their perspectives on safety information provision and self-reported influences on prescribing. Methods: We recruited primary care physicians for 12 focus groups in Montreal, Sacramento, Toulouse and Vancouver. A thematic analysis of the interview data followed a five-stage framework analysis approach. Results: Fifty-seven family physicians (19 women, 38 men) participated. Physicians expected a commercial bias and generally considered themselves to be immune from influence. They also appreciated the exchange and the information on new drugs. Across all sites, physicians expressed concern about missing harm information; however, attitudes to increased regulation of sales visits in France and the US were generally negative. A common solution to inadequate harm information was to seek further commercially sourced information. Physicians at all sites also expressed sensitivity to critiques from medical students and residents about promotional interactions. Conclusions: Physicians have contradictory views on the inadequate harm information received from sales representatives, linked to their lack of awareness of the drugs' safety profiles. Commonly used strategies to mitigate information bias are unlikely to be effective. Alternate information sources to inform prescribing decisions, and changes in the way that physicians and sales representatives interact are needed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalHealth Policy
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Primary Health Care
Physicians
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Primary Care Physicians
France
Safety
Family Physicians
Focus Groups
Medical Students
Canada
Interviews

Keywords

  • Focus groups
  • Health services research
  • Patient safety
  • Pharmaceutical policy
  • Pharmaceutical promotion
  • Primary care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

Reconciling a "pleasant exchange" with evidence of information bias : A three-country study on pharmaceutical sales visits in primary care. / Reynolds, Ellen; Guénette, Line; Lexchin, Joel; Cassels, Alan; Wilkes, Michael S; Durrieu, Geneviève; Beaulieu, Marie Dominique; Mintzes, Barbara.

In: Health Policy, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Reynolds, Ellen ; Guénette, Line ; Lexchin, Joel ; Cassels, Alan ; Wilkes, Michael S ; Durrieu, Geneviève ; Beaulieu, Marie Dominique ; Mintzes, Barbara. / Reconciling a "pleasant exchange" with evidence of information bias : A three-country study on pharmaceutical sales visits in primary care. In: Health Policy. 2018.
@article{ed87901faba44f0d8fce74f62211a516,
title = "Reconciling a {"}pleasant exchange{"} with evidence of information bias: A three-country study on pharmaceutical sales visits in primary care",
abstract = "Objectives: To examine and compare the experiences and attitudes of primary care physicians in three different regulatory environments (United States, Canada, and France) towards interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives, particularly their perspectives on safety information provision and self-reported influences on prescribing. Methods: We recruited primary care physicians for 12 focus groups in Montreal, Sacramento, Toulouse and Vancouver. A thematic analysis of the interview data followed a five-stage framework analysis approach. Results: Fifty-seven family physicians (19 women, 38 men) participated. Physicians expected a commercial bias and generally considered themselves to be immune from influence. They also appreciated the exchange and the information on new drugs. Across all sites, physicians expressed concern about missing harm information; however, attitudes to increased regulation of sales visits in France and the US were generally negative. A common solution to inadequate harm information was to seek further commercially sourced information. Physicians at all sites also expressed sensitivity to critiques from medical students and residents about promotional interactions. Conclusions: Physicians have contradictory views on the inadequate harm information received from sales representatives, linked to their lack of awareness of the drugs' safety profiles. Commonly used strategies to mitigate information bias are unlikely to be effective. Alternate information sources to inform prescribing decisions, and changes in the way that physicians and sales representatives interact are needed.",
keywords = "Focus groups, Health services research, Patient safety, Pharmaceutical policy, Pharmaceutical promotion, Primary care",
author = "Ellen Reynolds and Line Gu{\'e}nette and Joel Lexchin and Alan Cassels and Wilkes, {Michael S} and Genevi{\`e}ve Durrieu and Beaulieu, {Marie Dominique} and Barbara Mintzes",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.01.010",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Health Policy",
issn = "0168-8510",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reconciling a "pleasant exchange" with evidence of information bias

T2 - A three-country study on pharmaceutical sales visits in primary care

AU - Reynolds, Ellen

AU - Guénette, Line

AU - Lexchin, Joel

AU - Cassels, Alan

AU - Wilkes, Michael S

AU - Durrieu, Geneviève

AU - Beaulieu, Marie Dominique

AU - Mintzes, Barbara

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Objectives: To examine and compare the experiences and attitudes of primary care physicians in three different regulatory environments (United States, Canada, and France) towards interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives, particularly their perspectives on safety information provision and self-reported influences on prescribing. Methods: We recruited primary care physicians for 12 focus groups in Montreal, Sacramento, Toulouse and Vancouver. A thematic analysis of the interview data followed a five-stage framework analysis approach. Results: Fifty-seven family physicians (19 women, 38 men) participated. Physicians expected a commercial bias and generally considered themselves to be immune from influence. They also appreciated the exchange and the information on new drugs. Across all sites, physicians expressed concern about missing harm information; however, attitudes to increased regulation of sales visits in France and the US were generally negative. A common solution to inadequate harm information was to seek further commercially sourced information. Physicians at all sites also expressed sensitivity to critiques from medical students and residents about promotional interactions. Conclusions: Physicians have contradictory views on the inadequate harm information received from sales representatives, linked to their lack of awareness of the drugs' safety profiles. Commonly used strategies to mitigate information bias are unlikely to be effective. Alternate information sources to inform prescribing decisions, and changes in the way that physicians and sales representatives interact are needed.

AB - Objectives: To examine and compare the experiences and attitudes of primary care physicians in three different regulatory environments (United States, Canada, and France) towards interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives, particularly their perspectives on safety information provision and self-reported influences on prescribing. Methods: We recruited primary care physicians for 12 focus groups in Montreal, Sacramento, Toulouse and Vancouver. A thematic analysis of the interview data followed a five-stage framework analysis approach. Results: Fifty-seven family physicians (19 women, 38 men) participated. Physicians expected a commercial bias and generally considered themselves to be immune from influence. They also appreciated the exchange and the information on new drugs. Across all sites, physicians expressed concern about missing harm information; however, attitudes to increased regulation of sales visits in France and the US were generally negative. A common solution to inadequate harm information was to seek further commercially sourced information. Physicians at all sites also expressed sensitivity to critiques from medical students and residents about promotional interactions. Conclusions: Physicians have contradictory views on the inadequate harm information received from sales representatives, linked to their lack of awareness of the drugs' safety profiles. Commonly used strategies to mitigate information bias are unlikely to be effective. Alternate information sources to inform prescribing decisions, and changes in the way that physicians and sales representatives interact are needed.

KW - Focus groups

KW - Health services research

KW - Patient safety

KW - Pharmaceutical policy

KW - Pharmaceutical promotion

KW - Primary care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041183416&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041183416&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.01.010

DO - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.01.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 29395543

AN - SCOPUS:85041183416

JO - Health Policy

JF - Health Policy

SN - 0168-8510

ER -