AMNews
August 20, 2001
by Cheryl Jackson
“Leaders at the Queen City Physicians Group in Cincinnati figured that if drug company representatives wanted to lavish their doctors with gifts, why not instead have the reps give something that would help the practice and its patients? Hence, the thought process that led to the 56-physician multispecialty group’s plan to charge $65 for a 10-minute visit to listen to a pitch from a drug company sales rep.”
Frank A. Reddick, M.D., chair of the AMA’s Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (CEJA):
“This is setting up a commercial relationship, and it might prove a refreshing approach in that it’s a straightforward transaction. Whatever the pharmaceutical reps would have you say about their role, their role is a commercial one.” “Putting it on a flatly commercial way to access the physicians might actually lead to fewer of the sort of concerns that CEJA or the AMA has about gifts to physicians and some things that really aren’t related to the physician’s practice, like taking them to the ballgame. It may prove the wave of the future.”
Comment: From an unrelated letter in the same edition of AMNews:
Herbert Rakatansky, M.D., immediate past chair of CEJA:
“There is clear evidence that acceptance of similar gifts from industry influences prescribing habits. Such gifts are prohibited by opinion 8.061. Doctors who accept such gifts maintain they are not so influenced. The literature suggests otherwise. It is desirable for physicians to avoid even the appearance of impropriety in these circumstances.”
The new chair of AMA’s CEJA could learn from the prior chair. Or is this another unfortunate misstep in the transformation of the AMA?