Pharmaceutical companies promotional gifts effect on doctors' prescribing

sudanese study.

| Posted in: Science

Journal name: World Journal of Pharmaceutical Research
Original article title: Pharmaceutical companies promotional gifts effect on doctors' prescribing
The WJPR includes peer-reviewed publications such as scientific research papers, reports, review articles, company news, thesis reports and case studies in areas of Biology, Pharmaceutical industries and Chemical technology while incorporating ancient fields of knowledge such combining Ayurveda with scientific data.
This page presents a generated summary with additional references; See source (below) for actual content.
Subtitle: sudanese study.

Original source:

This page is merely a summary which is automatically generated hence you should visit the source to read the original article which includes the author, publication date, notes and references.

Author:

Kamal Addin Mohammad Ahmad Idris and Ahmad Dahab Ahmad


World Journal of Pharmaceutical Research:

(An ISO 9001:2015 Certified International Journal)

Full text available for: Pharmaceutical companies promotional gifts effect on doctors' prescribing

Source type: An International Peer Reviewed Journal for Pharmaceutical and Medical and Scientific Research

Doi: 10.20959/wjpr20167-6620


Download the PDF file of the original publication


Summary of article contents:

1) Introduction

The interaction between healthcare providers and the pharmaceutical industry has come under scrutiny due to concerns that promotional gifts may influence doctors' prescribing behaviors. This study investigates the perceptions and practices of Sudanese doctors regarding pharmaceutical companies’ gifts and their potential impact on prescribing patterns. Conducted across various medical specialties and settings, the research aimed to gauge the level of awareness and ethical considerations among physicians concerning these interactions.

2) The Ethics of Gift Acceptance

A significant finding from the study revealed that a majority of Sudanese doctors (66.8%) considered accepting gifts from pharmaceutical representatives as ethical and a normal practice. Despite the prevalence and acceptance of such gifts, only 46.8% believed that these gifts affect their own prescribing behavior. Interestingly, 65.8% felt that gifts do sway their colleagues' prescribing patterns, indicating a disconnect between personal and peer influence perceptions. This acceptance highlights an ethical gray area, as the lack of awareness surrounding potential conflicts of interest and reciprocity norms may lead to compromised judgment in prescribing decisions.

3) Awareness Deficits in Ethical Guidelines

The study found alarming gaps in awareness regarding ethical guidelines in pharmaceutical promotions. More than three-quarters (76.4%) of the participants were not aware of any codes or laws governing the acceptance of gifts from pharmaceutical companies. This lack of knowledge likely contributes to the normalization of gift acceptance and fosters a culture where doctors may unknowingly bias their prescribing in favor of promoting companies. The absence of a structured ethical framework in Sudan could perpetuate unethical practices, warranting a need for greater education and regulation in this arena.

4) Impact on Patient Relationships and Prescribing Costs

Participants were largely oblivious to the broader implications of their acceptance of gifts. Only 18% recognized that the costs associated with pharmaceutical gifts are likely passed on to patients through increased drug prices. The study points to an essential aspect of patient confidentiality and trust that may be compromised, as many doctors felt uncomfortable disclosing their acceptance of gifts to patients. Thus, this dynamic could undermine the doctor-patient relationship, potentially leading to a lack of transparency in medical practices and judgments about treatment options.

5) Conclusion

The study highlights significant issues regarding the interaction between Sudanese doctors and pharmaceutical companies. With a high rate of acceptance for promotional gifts and widespread ignorance of ethical codes, there is an urgent need for enhanced awareness and regulation in the field of pharmaceutical promotion. By establishing a structured ethical code and fostering education about the implications of gift acceptance, stakeholders can help mitigate the potential negative impacts on doctors' prescribing behavior and safeguard patient interests. A collective effort from medical professionals and relevant organizations will be crucial in reforming these interactions to foster ethical practice and trust within the healthcare system.

FAQ section (important questions/answers):

What was the main objective of the Sudanese study?

The main objective was to verify the views and practices of Sudanese doctors regarding the effect of pharmaceutical companies' gifts on their prescribing behavior.

What percentage of doctors received gifts from pharmaceutical companies?

A significant majority, 80.5%, of Sudanese doctors reported receiving various gifts from pharmaceutical representatives.

Did the doctors believe gifts affected their prescribing behavior?

Only 46.8% of the doctors believed that gifts alone affected their prescribing behavior, while 55.1% acknowledged that promotion, in general, impacted their prescribing.

How many doctors are aware of ethical codes for gifts?

A majority, 76.4%, of the participants were unaware of any codes or laws governing the acceptance of gifts from pharmaceutical companies.

What is the general attitude towards receiving gifts?

Many participants, 66.8%, considered accepting gifts ethically acceptable, believing it to be normal practice.

What conclusion did the study reach regarding Sudanese doctors?

The study concluded that Sudanese doctors need to raise their awareness about the rules governing pharmaceutical promotions and their potential negative impact on patient relationships.

Glossary definitions and references:

Scientific and Ayurvedic Glossary list for “Pharmaceutical companies promotional gifts effect on doctors' prescribing”. This list explains important keywords that occur in this article and links it to the glossary for a better understanding of that concept in the context of Ayurveda and other topics.

1) Study (Studying):
The study conducted aimed to assess the impact of pharmaceutical companies' promotional gifts on the prescribing behavior of doctors in Sudan. With a systematic approach using questionnaires, it gathered data to explore medical professionals’ perceptions and ethical considerations regarding accepting such gifts, analyzing implications for health care and patient care.

2) Table:
Tables in the research represent a concise way to present key demographic data and outcomes from the survey. They organize information such as age, gender, and practice location, making it easier to identify trends and patterns within the physician population, ultimately aiding the analysis of results regarding gift acceptance.

3) Drug:
Drugs are medications prescribed by doctors that can be influenced by pharmaceutical promotions. The study investigates how the acceptance of gifts from pharmaceutical companies may affect prescribers’ choices between different drug products, reflecting on potential biases resulting from the relationship between physicians and the drug industry.

4) Nature:
The term nature refers to the characteristics and types of gifts received by physicians from pharmaceutical representatives. Understanding the nature of these gifts helps professionals and regulatory bodies evaluate how they might impact prescribing behavior, as well as ethical considerations surrounding the acceptance of gifts within healthcare.

5) Cutan:
Sudan is the geographical focus of the study, where research was conducted among local doctors. The cultural, social, and economic context of Sudan is vital for understanding the acceptance of pharmaceutical gifts and its implications on healthcare practices, thus providing insights that may differ from other regions.

6) Discussion:
The discussion section of the study synthesizes findings, relating them to existing literature and ethical considerations. It allows for an exploration of implications for medical practitioners and the healthcare system in Sudan, as well as recommendations for future policies regarding pharmaceutical promotions and their influence on prescriber behavior.

7) Practising (Practicing):
Practicing refers to the active engagement of doctors in their respective medical fields. Understanding the habits, attitudes, and decision-making processes of practicing physicians in Sudan is critical in this study to evaluate how promotional gifts might alter their professional conduct and ultimately affect patient care.

8) Filling (Filled):
Filling pertains to the completion of questionnaires by participating doctors. It underscores the importance of data collection in the study, ensuring accurate and thorough responses that reflect doctors’ experiences and beliefs regarding pharmaceutical gifts. This process is vital for the validity of the study’s findings.

9) Company:
Company refers to pharmaceutical businesses that provide promotional gifts to healthcare providers. Understanding the motivations and strategies of pharmaceutical companies in their promotional activities helps to illuminate the potential conflicts of interest and ethical challenges faced by doctors when accepting these gifts.

10) House:
House in this context could refer to house officers, which are junior doctors in training. Their participation in the study highlights varying levels of experience and perspectives on accepting gifts from pharmaceutical representatives, potentially influencing the overall findings regarding ethical views in medical practice.

11) Male:
Male is a demographic factor representing a substantial portion of the surveyed doctors. Understanding gender distribution within the study allows for analysis of potential differences in attitudes toward pharmaceutical promotions, gift acceptance, and ethical considerations, providing insights into how gender may influence professional behavior.

12) Knowledge:
Knowledge encompasses the awareness and understanding doctors possess regarding the ethical implications of accepting gifts from pharmaceutical companies. A lack of knowledge about relevant guidelines and potential biases emphasizes the necessity for educational initiatives that promote ethical decision-making among healthcare providers in Sudan.

13) Medicine:
Medicine refers to the field in which the surveyed doctors operate. Insights into the practice of medicine in Sudan, particularly with respect to prescribing behaviors influenced by pharmaceutical promotions, underline the need for ethical standards to protect the integrity of medical practice and patient trust.

14) Activity:
Activity in this context relates to the interactions between doctors and pharmaceutical representatives, especially concerning gift-giving. Analyzing the nature and frequency of these activities aids in understanding the impact they have on prescribing habits and the broader implications for medical ethics and patient care.

15) Stealing (Theft):
Stealing metaphorically indicates the ethical concerns surrounding the acceptance of gifts from pharmaceutical companies. The study implies that accepting gifts can be viewed as stealing from patients, as the costs associated with gifts might be passed onto them through higher drug prices, raising substantial ethical dilemmas.

16) Raising:
Raising refers to the focus on enhancing awareness among doctors about the implications of accepting promotional gifts. The study highlights the need for educational initiatives to raise understanding of potential biases, ethical standards, and the repercussions of such interactions on patient relationships and healthcare integrity.

17) Account:
Account in this context relates to the responsibility of healthcare professionals to account for their actions regarding accepting gifts. Doctors must evaluate the ethical implications associated with their decisions to accept gifts from pharmaceutical companies to ensure transparency and uphold trust in the patient-provider relationship.

18) Science (Scientific):
Science broadly refers to the knowledge base that underlies medical practice, including evidence-based medicine. The role of science is crucial in evaluating the influences of pharmaceutical promotions on prescribing behaviors, demanding an intersection of empirical evidence and ethical conduct in the practice of healthcare.

19) Reason:
Reason pertains to the rationale behind why doctors may perceive accepting gifts from pharmaceutical representatives as acceptable behavior. Understanding the reasons behind these beliefs can help develop targeted interventions to address misconceptions and foster ethical practices in medical environments.

20) Shinja (Sinja, Simja):
Sinja is mentioned as one of the towns where participating doctors practice. Recognizing the diversity of practice locations within Sudan, including Sinja, aids in understanding regional differences in perspectives toward pharmaceutical promotions and their implications on medical practices throughout the country.

21) Rules:
Rules refer to the ethical codes or guidelines that govern medical professionals’ interactions with the pharmaceutical industry. The study emphasizes the lack of awareness and the need for established rules to guide doctors in their acceptance of gifts, ensuring integrity in prescribing practices.

22) Visit:
Visit in this context refers to the visits made by pharmaceutical representatives to healthcare providers. These visits are integral to the promotional activities that influence doctors’ prescribing patterns, underscoring the need for scrutiny and potential regulation of such interactions within the healthcare system.

23) Money:
Money symbolizes the financial aspects of pharmaceutical promotions, including how costs incurred by companies for gifts may ultimately inflate drug prices. Recognizing this connection is essential in understanding the economic implications of gifts on healthcare and the quality of patient care provided.

24) Cash (Cas):
Cash signifies monetary gifts, which are often considered unethical in medical settings. While most physicians in the study reported receiving non-cash gifts, awareness about any form of financial incentive being offered could fundamentally alter their perceptions towards acceptance of promotional gifts.

25) Prey:
Prey metaphorically alludes to how physicians may become vulnerable targets for pharmaceutical companies seeking to influence their prescribing habits through gifts. This dynamic stresses the potential impact of promotional behaviors on doctors’ professionalism and the integrity of healthcare interactions.

26) Pir:
Peer relates to the perceptions and behaviors of colleagues regarding the acceptance of gifts from pharmaceutical companies. Understanding the peer influence among medical professionals can provide insights into collective attitudes within the healthcare community and how this affects individual practices and ethics.

27) Pur:
Poor is used in the context of limited awareness or understanding among doctors regarding the ethical implications of accepting pharmaceutical gifts. This lack of awareness compromises their ability to navigate the complexities of pharmaceutical promotions and can negatively affect the quality of patient care.

Other Science Concepts:

[back to top]

Discover the significance of concepts within the article: ‘Pharmaceutical companies promotional gifts effect on doctors' prescribing’. Further sources in the context of Science might help you critically compare this page with similair documents:

Professional ethics, Ethical Concern, Cross-sectional study, Response rate, Public health interest.

Concepts being referred in other categories, contexts and sources.

Social norm.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: