Pharmaceuticals: The influence of the pharmaceutical industry has led to inappropriate prescribing by doctors, it has been claimed.
In addition, steps must be taken to restore appropriate boundaries between the pharmaceutical industry and the medical profession, according to Dr Amy Brodkey, associate professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.
Prof Brodkey told a joint meeting of the Irish College of Psychiatrists and the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland Divisions of the Royal College of Psychiatrists that the influence of pharmaceutical companies led to "demonstrable harms, including less effective, wasteful and sometimes harmful prescribing practices".
Emphasising her concern at what she termed a growing conflict of interest, Dr Brodkey said: "Research shows that doctors who get information from commercial sources have prescribing patterns that are not good. They use the newest agents, more expensive drugs and prescribe inappropriately with less use of generic formulations.
"Studies show that doctors are indeed influenced by their interactions with industry in the form of gifts, samples, travel funding, honoraria, interaction with sales representatives, attendance at sponsored symposia and research support," she added.
"The marketing budgets of drug companies exceed twice that spent on research and development and constitute about one- third of revenue expenditure," she told psychiatrists at the Dublin meeting.
"It is not my purpose to demonise the industry but to point out that as members of an altruistic profession, our responsibility as physicians is to patients. Industry's primary duty is to improve earnings for stockholders."
In the current climate of crumbling boundaries between these two enterprises, these differing bases had resulted in conflict of interest to the detriment of patients and the profession, Dr Brodkey believed.
However, Conn Clissmann, president of the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association (IPHA), which represents pharmaceutical industry in Ireland, refuted Dr Brodkey's claims, saying they were not relevant in a European context.
"While we influence doctors in terms of new medicines, we work in a very regulated environment in which compliance is constantly improving," he said.
Emphasising that doctors were discerning about the information they absorbed, Mr Clissmann said: "The idea that attendance at a pharmaceutical company sponsored meeting was bound to influence doctors and bound to be to patients' disadvantage is a very sweeping claim."
He said the IPHA code, which had been approved by successive ministers for health, was constantly evolving.
"This has led to increased compliance in areas such as corporate hospitality, the work of industry employed nurse advisers and relations between industry and patient groups.
"The ultimate beneficiary of the relationship [ between drug companies and doctors] is the patient.
"Both parties are kept aware of new developments and experiences with existing treatments," Mr Clissmann added.