Industry Ties in Otolaryngology: Initial Insights from the Physician Payment Sunshine Act

• Published in: Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery 2015-06, Vol.152 (6), p.993-999
• Main Authors: Rathi, Vinay K., Samuel, Andre M., Mehra, Saral
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (U.S.) - economics; Cross-Sectional Studies; Databases, Factual; Female; Gift Giving - ethics; Humans; Industry - economics; Industry - ethics; Interprofessional Relations; Male; Otolaryngology - economics; Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - economics; Practice Patterns, Physicians' - economics; Quality Assurance, Health Care; Retrospective Studies; United States
• ISSN: 0194-5998; 1097-6817
• DOI: 10.1177/0194599815573718

Objective To characterize nonresearch payments made by industry to otolaryngologists in order to explore how the potential for conflicts of interests varies among otolaryngologists and compares between otolaryngologists and other surgical specialists. Study Design Retrospective cross-sectional database analysis. Setting Open Payments program database recently released by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Subjects Surgeons nationwide who were identified as receiving nonresearch payment from industry in accordance with the Physician Payment Sunshine Act. Methods The proportion of otolaryngologists receiving payment, the mean payment per otolaryngologist, and the standard deviation thereof were determined using the Open Payments database and compared to other surgical specialties. Otolaryngologists were further compared by specialization, census region, sponsor, and payment amount. Results Less than half of otolaryngologists (48.1%) were reported as receiving payments over the study period, the second smallest proportion among surgical specialties. Otolaryngologists received the lowest mean payment per compensated individual ($573) compared to other surgical specialties. Although otolaryngology had the smallest variance in payment among surgical specialties (SD, $2806), the distribution was skewed by top earners; the top 10% of earners accounted for 87% ($2,199,254) of all payment to otolaryngologists. Otolaryngologists in the West census region were less likely to receive payments (38.6%, P < .001). Conclusion Over the study period, otolaryngologists appeared to have more limited financial ties with industry compared to other surgeons, though variation exists within otolaryngology. Further refinement of the Open Payments database is needed to explore differences between otolaryngologists and leverage payment information as a tool for self-regulation.