6533b7defe1ef96bd12769be

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Analysis of the conflicts of interest disclosed by the program reviewers of the scoliosis research society (SRS) congresses, 2010-2014.

Joaquín AlfonsoJesús BurgosCarlos BarriosEduardo HeviaJosé Miguel Lloris

subject

Medical DoctorsMedical ImplantsEconomicsHealth Care ProvidersOrthopedic Surgerylcsh:MedicineSocial Sciences0302 clinical medicineSpine surgeryShareholderMedicine and Health SciencesMedical Personnellcsh:ScienceMusculoskeletal SystemReimbursementSocieties MedicalSurgical research030222 orthopedicsMultidisciplinaryProfessionsScoliosisEngineering and TechnologyAnatomyResearch ArticleBiotechnologymedicine.medical_specialtyAdvisory CommitteesMEDLINESurgical and Invasive Medical ProceduresBioengineeringmacromolecular substances03 medical and health sciencesHealth EconomicsMusculoskeletal System ProceduresPolitical sciencePhysiciansparasitic diseasesmedicineHumansSpinal implantSurgeonsConflict of InterestResearchlcsh:RfungiConflict of interestBiology and Life SciencesCongresses as TopicSpineHealth CareFamily medicinePeople and Placeslcsh:QPopulation GroupingsMedical Devices and Equipment030217 neurology & neurosurgeryFinance

description

Background Conflicts of interest (COI) between industry and surgeons frequently introduce biases into surgical research. The abstracts submitted for presentation in scientific congresses are usually vetted for any indication of commercial bias. Members of review program committees regularly have recognized qualifications, and therefore certain COI are unavoidable. This study aims to determine the prevalence and magnitude of possible COI among those responsible for the selection of presentations at two important international conferences on spine surgery during a five-year period. Methodology COI declarations by those responsible for the final programs of the annual SRS (Scoliosis Research Society) and IMAST (International Meeting of Advanced Spine Technologies) conferences from 2010 to 2014 were collected and analyzed from data published by the corresponding scientific programs. The SRS's disclosure index did not contain financial amounts; therefore, this aspect could not be analyzed. Results Five scientific committees and 117 members (76 individuals) were studied. Of these 76, 41 (53.9%) participated in more than one conflict of interest (>1 COI). Scientific committee members were from 11 countries across 4 continents, but most were from the Unites States (76.9%). Of the 117 program reviewers, 65.8% declared >1 COI and 34.2% reported no COI. The 77 program reviewers who disclosed a potential COI declared a total of 273 COI (mean = 3.54 COI/member). Overall, 36.0%, 26.1%, 10.7%, and 10.7% of the COI corresponded to consultancies, research funds, bureau participation, and advisory board panel participation, respectively. Stockholder reimbursement corresponded to 8.8% of the disclosed COI, and financial or material support were mentioned in 7.4% of COI. Among the COI disclosures, 55 companies were mentioned, and 5 of the top 10 companies involved in spinal device markets were responsible for 65.2% of the COI. Conclusions More than two thirds of the members of the SRS and IMAST scientific committees reported COI. Consultancies and research grants account for two thirds of these. Most of the grants and major COI are related to the five companies leading the spinal implant market.

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12530/35218