Orthopaedics, ethics, and industry: Appropriateness of gifts, grants, and awards

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (Impact Factor: 2.77). 03/2000;
Source: PubMed


At the Academic Orthopaedic Society meeting in San Francisco on November 8 and 9, 1996, the membership addressed the issue of ethics and industry in an academic setting. Using a Delphi panel technique, they arrived at a definition of conflict of interest, and 41 separate points of acceptable and unacceptable behavior related to gifts, research awards, and funding of various activities. The Academic Orthopaedic Society Delphi Committee also mailed 191 questionnaires (157 department chairpersons and 34 program directors) to 157 training programs. The respective department chairpersons and program directors were asked to copy and distribute the questionnaires to staff (faculty) and house officers (residents and fellows) to complete anonymously and return them for collation. Ninety-one programs (58%) responded. Three hundred and fifty-two questionnaires were returned (237 from staff, 115 from house officers), each of which expressed agreement or lack of agreement with the Delphi panel report using a Likert scale technique. With only modest (and usually predictable) disagreement on certain items, the final statements by the Delphi panel were supported strongly by the survive results. The Academic Orthopaedic Society believes that the major points arrived at by the panelists should serve as the basis for ethical guidelines in the relation between academic orthopaedic institutions and industry.

6 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Industry support provides critical resources for researchers in departments of orthopaedic surgery, and affords research that otherwise likely would not be possible. However, in contrast to sponsorship from the federal agencies or most foundations, corporate sponsorship raises ethical, practical, and legal issues for the individual researcher, the department, the academic institution, the scientific community at large, and industry. Most of these issues relate to ownership of intellectual property, confidentiality, disclosure of results, and apparent bias. For the public the issues involve ethical issues, including trust. Academic institutions have evolved approaches for contracts with industry, which minimize, but not eliminate these problems. Given appropriate contracts, corporate sponsorship of research is not only mutually beneficial, but for many departments, critical.
    Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 08/2003; DOI:10.1097/01.blo.0000074412.99625.8e · 2.77 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The author reviewed 603 consecutive articles and scientific presentations pertaining to adult lower extremity orthopedic research from 2 major American orthopedic journals and 2 major American orthopedic meetings. The prevalence of commercial funding in these studies was 50%. Clinical studies of total hip arthroplasty implants by American investigators were commercially sponsored in 75% of studies. Commercially funded hip research reported positive outcomes in 93% of studies, whereas independently funded researchers reported good results in only 37%. Funded clinical studies of total knee arthroplasty implants yielded good results in 75%; this is in contrast to the findings of independently funded investigators, who reported positive conclusions in only 20% of studies. Investigators receiving royalties reported no negative outcomes related to the respective devices. The source of research funding was strongly correlated with reported outcomes.
    The Journal of Arthroplasty 11/2003; 18(7 Suppl 1):138-45. DOI:10.1016/S0883-5403(03)00289-4 · 2.67 Impact Factor

  • Journal of surgical orthopaedic advances 02/2004; 13(3):137-8. DOI:10.1053/j.semss.2004.07.001
Show more