Skip to main content

New Restrictions on Financial Conflicts of Interest in CME


As reported in The Carlat Psychiatry Blog, the American Medical Association recently approved a report that may have substantial impacts on industry funding of continuing medical education. This report, authored by the AMA's Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, recommends:

"When possible, CME should be provided without [industry] support or the participation of individuals who have financial interests in the educational subject matter. " (page 99 of report)


What good is such a qualified recommendation from a mere report? The difference is that this report comes from, and was officially approved by, the AMA. The Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), which certifies providers of CME, is tightly linked to the AMA, such that CME credits are labelled "AMA PRA Category 1 Credit". Thus, the ACCME will likely need to modify its Standards for Commercial Support to impose greater restrictions on how CME can be funded and on the use of speakers with financial conflicts of interest.

There is plenty of wiggle room in these recommendations. For example, the report concedes that in certain cases exceptions to restrictions on funding and speakers may be needed to permit access to high-quality events. Thus, it remains unclear how much this report and resultant changes in ACCME standards will actually change current practices.

Nonetheless, this is an important milestone in efforts to reduce conflicts of interest in CME.

Comments

thank you for sharing such nice information about Restriction for Financial conflicts.. i love to face this instead of going away...thank you for the post..
Anonymous said…
Emboldened to new heights of educational integrity with this clarion call will the AMA next be counseling the thousands of med and healthcare students (including minorities and financially disadvantaged) who currently receive scholarships from big pharma? A great opportunity to state their position on influence peddling went begging earlier this year when AMA received $250,000 from Pfizer for their Excellence in Medicine Awards.

Popular posts from this blog

Lost in Translation: Google’s Translation of Palliative Care to ‘Do-Nothing Care’

by: Cynthia X. Pan, MD, FACP, AGSF (@Cxpan5X)

My colleagues often ask me: “Why are Chinese patients so resistant to hospice and palliative care?” “Why are they so unrealistic?” “Don’t they understand that death is part of life?” “Is it true that with Chinese patients you cannot discuss advance directives?”

As a Chinese speaking geriatrician and palliative care physician practicing in Flushing, NY, I have cared for countless Chinese patients with serious illnesses or at end of life.  Invariably, when Chinese patients or families see me, they ask me if I speak Chinese. When I reply “I do” in Mandarin, the relief and instant trust I see on their faces make my day meaningful and worthwhile.

At my hospital, the patient population is about 30% Asian, with the majority of these being Chinese. Most of these patients require language interpretation.  It becomes an interesting challenge and opportunity, as we often need to discuss advance directives, goals of care, and end of life care options…

Delirium: A podcast with Sharon Inouye

In this week's GeriPal podcast we discuss delirium, with a focus on prevention. We are joined by internationally acclaimed delirium researcher Sharon Inouye, MD, MPH. Dr Inouye is Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Director of the Aging Brain Center in the Institute for Aging Research at Hebrew SeniorLife.

Dr. Inouye's research focuses on delirium and functional decline in hospitalized older patients, resulting in more than 200 peer-reviewed original articles to date. She has developed and validated a widely used tool to identify delirium called the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), and she founded the Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP) to prevent delirium in hospitalized patients.

We are also joined by guest host Lindsey Haddock, MD, a geriatrics fellow at UCSF who asks a great question about how to implement a HELP program, or aspects of the program, in a hospital with limited resources.  


You can also find us on Youtube!


Listen to GeriPal Podcasts on:
iTunes…

Are Palliative Care Providers Better Prognosticators? A Podcast with Bob Gramling

Estimating prognosis is hard and clinicians get very little training on how to do it.  Maybe that is one of the reasons that clinicians are more likely to be optimistic and tend to overestimate patient survival by a factor of between 3 and 5.  The question is, aren't we better as palliative care clinicians than others in estimating prognosis?  This is part of our training and we do it daily.   We got to be better, right? 

Well, on todays podcast we have Bob Gramling from the Holly and Bob Miller Chair of Palliative Medicine at the University of Vermont to talk about his paper in Journal of Pain and Symptom Management (JPSM) titled “Palliative Care Clinician Overestimation of Survival in Advanced Cancer: Disparities and Association with End of Life Care”.

Big findings from this JPSM paper include that we, like all other clinicians, are an optimistic bunch and that it actually does impact outcomes.   In particular, the people whose survival was overestimated by a palliative care c…