 |
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine | |
| City: Philadelphia | State: PA | |
|
Commentary: Model samples, scholarship and curriculum policies are the highlights. The University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine has provided excellent policies regulating pharmaceutical industry marketing, but does not go as far in addressing potential conflicts of interest among the institution staff. The fact that much of what the institution provided constituted guidelines, and the absence of specific enforcement mechanisms listed, is concerning. |
||
| Gifts & Meals |  |
The School of Medicine has banned completely gifts and meals provided directly by pharmaceutical representatives, although indirect funding of meals is permitted. |
| Consulting relationships | |
Professionals at the School of Medicine may consult on their "1 day in 7" time if the payments received are reasonable for the services provided. |
| Industry-funded speaking relationships | |
Professionals at the School of Medicine may consult (including providing presentations) on their "1 day in 7" time if the payments received are reasonable for the services provided. |
| Disclosure |  |
The School of Medicine provided no disclosure policy. |
| Pharmaceutical samples |  |
Model samples policy: "No physical medication samples are allowed within the institution and the institution practices. The distribution of sample medication vouchers in inpatient areas is prohibited." The School of Medicine also has a detailed policy on its voucher program for indigent medications and starter packs. |
| Purchasing & Formularies | |
Faculty members with financial conflicts of interest are forbidden from serving on purchasing committees. |
| Site Access | |
The School of Medicine requires pharmaceutical representatives to register once with the institution, and must have an appointment before being permitted on site. In addition, representatives may only conduct meetings in private offices and may not attend any conferences or reports. "Pharmaceutical company representatives are expected to communicate warnings and contraindications with the same fervor with which they promote indications and endorsements of medical experts." |
| On-campus Education | |
This policy does not stipulate a truly anonymized central fund for unrestricted grants, but it does allow for institutional control/approval of content, and non-CME educational events given by industry must not discuss non-formulary drugs. |
| Attendance at Industry-Sponsored Lectures & Meetings Off-Campus | |
According to this policy, reimbursement for travel and other funds related to off-site education may only be provided by industry through unrestricted educational grants. Industry may not select the recipient of these grants. |
| Industry Support for Scholarships & Funds for Trainees | |
Model policy: "In the case of professionals-in-training or other trainees, conference funds may be donated to a clinical department/division, provided that department faculty (and not the company) chooses the trainee to receive the funds for attending the meeting." |
| Medical school curriculum | |
Model language: "With regard to physicians-in-training, departmental curricula will include discussion and reflection on managing encounters with Industry representatives, and house staff should be instructed on how promotional activities may influence judgment in prescribing decisions and research activities." |
| Do the policies specify an oversight mechanism? |  |
Various named parties are responsible for the implementation of the guidelines given. |
| Are there explicit sanctions for noncompliance? |  |
Possible sanctions for non-compliance with the guidelines were not provided. |
 | |
| Model policy |
| Good progress toward model policy |
| No policy, or policy unlikely to have a substantial effect on behavior |
 | Did not report |
 | Policy not relevant to this institution (e.g., does not make purchasing decisions) |
