Survey of practices around pharmaceutical company funding for continuing professional development among medical oncologists and trainees in Australia

Yeh Chen Lee, René Kroon, Bogda Koczwara, Ian Haines, Kay Francis, Michael Millward, Richard Kefford, Ian Olver, Linda Mileshkin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Background: The completion of continuing professional development (CPD) is mandatory for medical oncologists and trainees (MO&T). Pharmaceutical companies may fund some CPD activities, but there is increasing debate about the potential for conflicts of interest (COI). Aim: To assess current practices around funding to attend CPD activities. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to Australian MO&T. The survey asked questions about current practices, institutional policies and perceptions about attending CPD funded by pharmaceutical companies. The design looked at comparing responses between MO&T as well as their understanding of and training around institutional and ethical process. Results: A total of 157 of 653 (24%) responses was received, the majority from MO (76%). Most CPD activities attended by MO&T were self-funded (53%), followed by funding from institutions (19%), pharmaceutical companies (16%) and salary award (16%). Most institutions allowed MO&T to receive CPD funding from professional organisations (104/157, 66%) or pharmaceutical companies (90/157, 57%). A minority of respondents (13/157, 8%) reported that the process to use pharmaceutical funds had been considered by an ethics committee. Although 103/157 (66%) had received pharmaceutical funding for CPD, most (109/157, 69%) reported never receiving training about potential COI. The lack of education was more noticeable among trainees (odds ratio (OR) 8.61, P = 0.02). MO&T acknowledged the potential bias towards a pharmaceutical product (P = 0.05) but believed there was adequate separation between themselves and pharmaceutical companies (P < 0.01). Conclusion: Majority of CPD attended by MO&T is self-funded. There is lack of clarity in institutional policies regarding external funding support for CPD activities. Formal education about potential COI is lacking.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)888-893
Number of pages6
JournalInternal Medicine Journal
Volume47
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2017
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • continuing medical industry
  • continuing professional development
  • drug industry
  • medical oncologist
  • pharmaceutical funding support

Cite this

Lee, Yeh Chen ; Kroon, René ; Koczwara, Bogda ; Haines, Ian ; Francis, Kay ; Millward, Michael ; Kefford, Richard ; Olver, Ian ; Mileshkin, Linda. / Survey of practices around pharmaceutical company funding for continuing professional development among medical oncologists and trainees in Australia. In: Internal Medicine Journal. 2017 ; Vol. 47, No. 8. pp. 888-893.
@article{8eeb4977cc7c49eb94a5929497583482,
title = "Survey of practices around pharmaceutical company funding for continuing professional development among medical oncologists and trainees in Australia",
abstract = "Background: The completion of continuing professional development (CPD) is mandatory for medical oncologists and trainees (MO&T). Pharmaceutical companies may fund some CPD activities, but there is increasing debate about the potential for conflicts of interest (COI). Aim: To assess current practices around funding to attend CPD activities. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to Australian MO&T. The survey asked questions about current practices, institutional policies and perceptions about attending CPD funded by pharmaceutical companies. The design looked at comparing responses between MO&T as well as their understanding of and training around institutional and ethical process. Results: A total of 157 of 653 (24{\%}) responses was received, the majority from MO (76{\%}). Most CPD activities attended by MO&T were self-funded (53{\%}), followed by funding from institutions (19{\%}), pharmaceutical companies (16{\%}) and salary award (16{\%}). Most institutions allowed MO&T to receive CPD funding from professional organisations (104/157, 66{\%}) or pharmaceutical companies (90/157, 57{\%}). A minority of respondents (13/157, 8{\%}) reported that the process to use pharmaceutical funds had been considered by an ethics committee. Although 103/157 (66{\%}) had received pharmaceutical funding for CPD, most (109/157, 69{\%}) reported never receiving training about potential COI. The lack of education was more noticeable among trainees (odds ratio (OR) 8.61, P = 0.02). MO&T acknowledged the potential bias towards a pharmaceutical product (P = 0.05) but believed there was adequate separation between themselves and pharmaceutical companies (P < 0.01). Conclusion: Majority of CPD attended by MO&T is self-funded. There is lack of clarity in institutional policies regarding external funding support for CPD activities. Formal education about potential COI is lacking.",
keywords = "continuing medical industry, continuing professional development, drug industry, medical oncologist, pharmaceutical funding support",
author = "Lee, {Yeh Chen} and Ren{\'e} Kroon and Bogda Koczwara and Ian Haines and Kay Francis and Michael Millward and Richard Kefford and Ian Olver and Linda Mileshkin",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/imj.13482",
language = "English",
volume = "47",
pages = "888--893",
journal = "Internal Medicine Journal",
issn = "1444-0903",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "8",

}

Survey of practices around pharmaceutical company funding for continuing professional development among medical oncologists and trainees in Australia. / Lee, Yeh Chen; Kroon, René; Koczwara, Bogda; Haines, Ian; Francis, Kay; Millward, Michael; Kefford, Richard; Olver, Ian; Mileshkin, Linda.

In: Internal Medicine Journal, Vol. 47, No. 8, 01.08.2017, p. 888-893.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Survey of practices around pharmaceutical company funding for continuing professional development among medical oncologists and trainees in Australia

AU - Lee, Yeh Chen

AU - Kroon, René

AU - Koczwara, Bogda

AU - Haines, Ian

AU - Francis, Kay

AU - Millward, Michael

AU - Kefford, Richard

AU - Olver, Ian

AU - Mileshkin, Linda

PY - 2017/8/1

Y1 - 2017/8/1

N2 - Background: The completion of continuing professional development (CPD) is mandatory for medical oncologists and trainees (MO&T). Pharmaceutical companies may fund some CPD activities, but there is increasing debate about the potential for conflicts of interest (COI). Aim: To assess current practices around funding to attend CPD activities. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to Australian MO&T. The survey asked questions about current practices, institutional policies and perceptions about attending CPD funded by pharmaceutical companies. The design looked at comparing responses between MO&T as well as their understanding of and training around institutional and ethical process. Results: A total of 157 of 653 (24%) responses was received, the majority from MO (76%). Most CPD activities attended by MO&T were self-funded (53%), followed by funding from institutions (19%), pharmaceutical companies (16%) and salary award (16%). Most institutions allowed MO&T to receive CPD funding from professional organisations (104/157, 66%) or pharmaceutical companies (90/157, 57%). A minority of respondents (13/157, 8%) reported that the process to use pharmaceutical funds had been considered by an ethics committee. Although 103/157 (66%) had received pharmaceutical funding for CPD, most (109/157, 69%) reported never receiving training about potential COI. The lack of education was more noticeable among trainees (odds ratio (OR) 8.61, P = 0.02). MO&T acknowledged the potential bias towards a pharmaceutical product (P = 0.05) but believed there was adequate separation between themselves and pharmaceutical companies (P < 0.01). Conclusion: Majority of CPD attended by MO&T is self-funded. There is lack of clarity in institutional policies regarding external funding support for CPD activities. Formal education about potential COI is lacking.

AB - Background: The completion of continuing professional development (CPD) is mandatory for medical oncologists and trainees (MO&T). Pharmaceutical companies may fund some CPD activities, but there is increasing debate about the potential for conflicts of interest (COI). Aim: To assess current practices around funding to attend CPD activities. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to Australian MO&T. The survey asked questions about current practices, institutional policies and perceptions about attending CPD funded by pharmaceutical companies. The design looked at comparing responses between MO&T as well as their understanding of and training around institutional and ethical process. Results: A total of 157 of 653 (24%) responses was received, the majority from MO (76%). Most CPD activities attended by MO&T were self-funded (53%), followed by funding from institutions (19%), pharmaceutical companies (16%) and salary award (16%). Most institutions allowed MO&T to receive CPD funding from professional organisations (104/157, 66%) or pharmaceutical companies (90/157, 57%). A minority of respondents (13/157, 8%) reported that the process to use pharmaceutical funds had been considered by an ethics committee. Although 103/157 (66%) had received pharmaceutical funding for CPD, most (109/157, 69%) reported never receiving training about potential COI. The lack of education was more noticeable among trainees (odds ratio (OR) 8.61, P = 0.02). MO&T acknowledged the potential bias towards a pharmaceutical product (P = 0.05) but believed there was adequate separation between themselves and pharmaceutical companies (P < 0.01). Conclusion: Majority of CPD attended by MO&T is self-funded. There is lack of clarity in institutional policies regarding external funding support for CPD activities. Formal education about potential COI is lacking.

KW - continuing medical industry

KW - continuing professional development

KW - drug industry

KW - medical oncologist

KW - pharmaceutical funding support

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026829169&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/imj.13482

DO - 10.1111/imj.13482

M3 - Article

VL - 47

SP - 888

EP - 893

JO - Internal Medicine Journal

JF - Internal Medicine Journal

SN - 1444-0903

IS - 8

ER -