Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Commercially funded CME programs and whether bias can be removed

Thomas Sullivan
Education
December 7, 2010
90 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share

The growing criticism of industry funded continuing medical education (CME) over the past several years has had a number of significant effects on the CME community. As the Accreditation Council of Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) annual report showed, from 2007 to the present, commercial support of CME dropped 29.3%, and the number of directly sponsored CME activities decreased over 7% between 2008 and 2009.

CME funding is extremely important because States require physicians to take continuing education courses to retain their medical licenses. Without CME doctors cannot practice. Consequently, what has concerned some over the past several years is that industry has been partly funding such programs so that doctors often pay “little or nothing for the instruction.”

Those who disapprove of this practice believe that “the reliance on industry funding allows drug and device companies to influence what is taught, potentially misleading physicians about the best treatments for patients and pushing up spending on prescription drugs.” There are numerous problems with this assertion.

First, the Accreditation Council of Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) has clear and strictly enforced guidelines which prohibit industry supporters from having any control whatsoever of the content being presented, as well as the speaker chosen to present the materials. In addition, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), as well as the Office of the Inspector General at HHS, have a number of well established guidelines regarding the proper role industry can play in supporting CME.

Second, the multiple stakeholders involved in every aspect of producing industry funded CME abide by the ACCME Standards of Commercial Support. Additionally, CME providers fully disclose commercial support in each program, and any potential conflicts of interest by the speakers.

Despite these safeguards, critics point out that because many other professionals pay for their own continuing education, doctors should begin doing the same. These critics believe that industry funded CME “is not education, but subtle marketing,” despite overwhelming evidence from three studies this year that showed almost no bias in commercially funded CME programs (Cleveland Clinic, Medscape, and UCSF).

Dr. Martin Samuels, a Harvard Medical School neurologist, announced the start of a new company, known as Lighthouse, that he says will provide CME to doctors across the country — without funding from the pharmaceutical industry.  A majority of the products coming out of medical publishers are being produced without industry funding.  This is the equivalent of a story about a new medical publisher putting out a twist on commercial support to get press coverage.

One of the main motivations for creating this company, according to Dr. Samuels, was that “doctors have lost confidence in CME and the public has lost confidence.” While he cited no evidence to substantiate this claim, Dr. Samuels, who is the head of neurology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, told the Boston Globe that within the CME community, there “is a feeling that everything is tainted.” Consequently, from the numerous programs we have conducted, and as the above cited studies clearly show, we are unaware of this “tainted feeling.”

Doctors by and large value the collaboration and innovation industry provides in all aspects of medicine, especially CME. Without the support and partnership with industry, CME programs would not be able to keep doctors up to date on new treatments, drugs, devices, and clinical data and they would not be able to get the hands-on, interactive experience they gain by attending such events.

While the company is still being pieced together, Samuels noted that “the work will be paid for by the sale of the curriculum to hospitals, medical societies, insurance companies, and other organizations that provide professional education to doctors.” This means that organizations will pay more so that the company can say they provide education free of industry influence.” But in catering to insurance companies, this will create a curriculum that focuses on formularies, generic drugs and cheaper treatments.

Consequently, Lighthouse has neglected to consider that it will be extremely difficult to “be completely pristine,” because insurance companies can pay doctors’ tuition to attend certain courses, and it will be impossible to hire faculty who have no relationships to industry whatsoever.” In fact, Dr. Nissen went as far as saying that “The biggest name people, the people who have the most expertise and are going to draw an audience — they are people who work with industry.”

The company first has to find customers, then they can decide who to hire. They will realize early on that doctors who teach CME don’t just show up and teach. These individuals have to know what they are doing to provide CME, which means finding an educational gap and meeting that gap, and the people best suited to do that are the individuals who have identified such needs and gaps by working with industry. This is a fact that Lighthouse should be familiar with considering two of the company’s founders “once had ties to MC Communications, a company that accepts industry funding for CME.”

In fact, one thing the Globe does not disclose is that the husband and wife team of Dr. Samuels and Susan Paoli, both worked on MC Communications (Pri-Med) programs, Additionally, the third cofounder, Jon Leibowitz, also worked for M/C.  According to my understanding they have all received significant amounts of money for commercially supported CME for many years it never bothered them before.  If now they think it’s bad, then they perhaps they should consider returning the money they earned, including the profits from honorarium and ownership positions.

The Globe story also does not include the facts or specific examples of what could have been the problem, which caused Samuels to leave.

MC Communications (Pri-Med) over the last two years has reached 45% practicing primary care physicians, and Dr. Samuels is a neurologist. The story only points out that Dr. Samuels tried to start a neurology program while at MC Communications, but it was not successful.

Accordingly, as Dr. Murray Kopelow, executive director of ACCME asserted, the criticism of industry supported CME is overblown because the “vast majority of providers comply with ACCME rules, which forbid industry funders from influencing the content of courses or who presents them.” Accordingly, with 42 percent of accredited providers not taking commercial support for their educational programs now, Dr. Kopelow acknowledged that Lighthouse’s approach is not unique. They just become another provider to compete with Jerry Avorn by utilizing Harvard resources to enrich their own pockets.

Ultimately, as Dr. Richard B. Reiling, Medical Director for the Presbyterian Cancer Center in Charlotte, NC pointed out in a Globe editorial, “what the physician learns at any venue, with or without commercial support, might well benefit patients and, in the long run, reduce costs.” While there may be concerns about how the pharmaceutical industry could taint a physician’s education, “the industry could also augment it.” He explained in a reply to the Globe that while there “have been abuses, most CME has been beneficial to doctors and patients, and physicians in general are not easily swayed by deceitful practices, and can recognize them when they occur.”

As for Dr. Samuels’ new company, he posed the question of who will make sure that there is no bias in those presentations. He explained that “commercial support does not obviate good approved CME; nor does approval guarantee valuable CME.” As a result, he recognized that since community hospitals cannot afford to provide quality CME without outside financial support.  Whether Samuels’ company, while started in good faith, will be here next year remains an unanswered question.  We wish them the best.

Thomas Sullivan is founder of Rockpointe who blogs at Policy and Medicine.

Submit a guest post and be heard.

Prev

William Osler's humor, and finding fun in medicine

December 7, 2010 Kevin 5
…
Next

Percy Harvin and how sleep apnea affected his migraine headaches

December 7, 2010 Kevin 2
…

Tagged as: Primary Care

Post navigation

< Previous Post
William Osler's humor, and finding fun in medicine
Next Post >
Percy Harvin and how sleep apnea affected his migraine headaches

More by Thomas Sullivan

  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    The benefits of academia-industry relationships

    Thomas Sullivan
  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    Elimination of industry support for CME is an urban myth

    Thomas Sullivan
  • a desk with keyboard and ipad with the kevinmd logo

    The FDA needs to issue guidance on the use of social media

    Thomas Sullivan

More in Education

  • The secret to success in medical school: self-awareness and courage

    Kaelor Gordon
  • Is mandating pre-medical training widening disparities in the U.S. physician workforce?

    Deepak Gupta, MD and Sarwan Kumar, MD
  • Equalizing the future of medical residencies: standardizing work hours and wages

    Deepak Gupta, MD and Sarwan Kumar, MD
  • From studying to baby kicks: Navigating motherhood in medical school

    Natalie Eichner-Seitz
  • The power of advocacy: a medical student’s journey to helping an uninsured immigrant

    Fabiola Plaza
  • From AI to love: the key to a better future in medical education

    Stevan Walkowski, DO
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Healing the damaged nurse-physician dynamic

      Angel J. Mena, MD and Ali Morin, MSN, RN | Policy
    • The struggle to fill emergency medicine residency spots: Exploring the factors behind the unfilled match

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Breaking the stigma: Addressing the struggles of physicians

      Jean Antonucci, MD | Physician
    • Beyond the disease: the power of empathy in health care

      Nana Dadzie Ghansah, MD | Physician
    • Deaths of despair: an urgent call for a collective response to the crisis in U.S. life expectancy

      Mohammed Umer Waris, MD | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • The hidden dangers of the Nebraska Heartbeat Act

      Meghan Sheehan, MD | Policy
    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • The fight for reproductive health: Why medication abortion matters

      Catherine Hennessey, MD | Physician
    • The vital importance of climate change education in medical schools

      Helen Kim, MD | Policy
    • Resetting the doctor-patient relationship: Navigating the challenges of modern primary care

      Jeffrey H. Millstein, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why it’s time to question medical traditions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The hidden gems of health care: Unlocking the potential of narrative medicine

      Dr. Najat Fadlallah | Physician
    • The realities of immigrant health care served hot from America’s melting pot

      Stella Cho | Policy
    • The dark side of immortality: What if we could live forever?

      Ketan Desai, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Lazarus: the dead man brought back to life

      William Lynes, MD | Conditions
    • Revolutionizing COPD management with virtual care solutions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 11 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

CME Spotlights

From MedPage Today

Latest News

  • Doc Moms, Mind the Gap -- $3M Earning Difference by Sex
  • Clinical Note Writing App Powered by GPT-4 Set to Debut This Year
  • Helping Patients Get Fit -- One Walk at a Time
  • TB Cases Rebound to Near Pre-Pandemic Levels, CDC Data Show
  • Marginalized Groups May Benefit More From Decreasing Air Pollution

Meeting Coverage

  • Switch to IL-23 Blocker Yields Deep Responses in Recalcitrant Plaque Psoriasis
  • Biomarkers of Response With Enfortumab Vedotin in Advanced Urothelial Cancer
  • At-Home Topical Therapy for Molluscum Contagiosum Gets High Marks
  • Outlook for Itchy Prurigo Nodularis Continues to Improve With IL-31 Antagonist
  • AAAAI President Shares Highlights From the 2023 Meeting
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Healing the damaged nurse-physician dynamic

      Angel J. Mena, MD and Ali Morin, MSN, RN | Policy
    • The struggle to fill emergency medicine residency spots: Exploring the factors behind the unfilled match

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Breaking the stigma: Addressing the struggles of physicians

      Jean Antonucci, MD | Physician
    • Beyond the disease: the power of empathy in health care

      Nana Dadzie Ghansah, MD | Physician
    • Deaths of despair: an urgent call for a collective response to the crisis in U.S. life expectancy

      Mohammed Umer Waris, MD | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • The hidden dangers of the Nebraska Heartbeat Act

      Meghan Sheehan, MD | Policy
    • The real cause of America’s opioid crisis: Doctors are not to blame

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Nobody wants this job. Should physicians stick around?

      Katie Klingberg, MD | Physician
    • The fight for reproductive health: Why medication abortion matters

      Catherine Hennessey, MD | Physician
    • The vital importance of climate change education in medical schools

      Helen Kim, MD | Policy
    • Resetting the doctor-patient relationship: Navigating the challenges of modern primary care

      Jeffrey H. Millstein, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why it’s time to question medical traditions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The hidden gems of health care: Unlocking the potential of narrative medicine

      Dr. Najat Fadlallah | Physician
    • The realities of immigrant health care served hot from America’s melting pot

      Stella Cho | Policy
    • The dark side of immortality: What if we could live forever?

      Ketan Desai, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Lazarus: the dead man brought back to life

      William Lynes, MD | Conditions
    • Revolutionizing COPD management with virtual care solutions [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today iMedicalApps
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Commercially funded CME programs and whether bias can be removed
11 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...