VA Proposes Rule To Limit Access To Sales Reps
17 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // May 11th, 2010 // 8:43 am
The US Veterans Administration, which runs a vast network of hospitals and healthcare facilities, is concerned about the influence the pharmaceutical industry has on treating patients. And since sales reps have “heavy interaction with local VA staff,” the VA has published a new rule to “ensure that (reps) do not negatively affect the quality of patient care.”
The new rule would require a pharmacy chief or other responsible official to “approve educational programs and materials” presented by reps to ensure materials focus on “clinician education as opposed to marketing.” Company names and logos, for instance, will not be permitted as part of educational material. And reps would be denied access to patient care areas - such as operating rooms and nursing stations, among other places - to ensure patient privacy and would be required to make appointments as opposed to having open and unresticted access.
Reps won’t be allowed to attend a medical center conference where patient-specific material is discussed or presented. And reps would also be prohibited from providing any food to VA staff or gifts above a “de minimis” value specified in the standards of ethical conduct for federal employees, and would prohibit VA employees from personally accepting drug samples. Any violations could result in suspending or permanently barring a sales force from VA facilities. You can read the complete proposed rule here.
Justice in MI
What’s kind of amazing is that reps were ever in pt. care areas, with the possible exception of device reps under limited circumstances, but even there….
Anyhoo, it sounds like it will come down to how “malleable” are he relevant “pharmacy chiefs or other responsible officials”…
Mike Wokasch
As the market continues to restrict access, the market and institutions must be prepared to assume the responsibilities for ensuring physicians stay current with the appropriate use of therapeutic alternatives. With these new restrictions I wonder if there has been a commensurate increase in continuing medical education funding at the VA to make certain their physicians and other healthcare providers stay current, especially for new products. I’m betting not.
Also, isn’t not having names of companies disclosed on educational programs or materials misleading, deceiving, and against all concerns about disclosure and transparency? Maybe not if they don’t plan on having any or at least any sponsored or prepared by industry.
mike@pharmareform.com
Sisyphus
Promotion is not educaton. Therefore, to link a decrease in a need for more education makes no sense. Sure, there should be increased educaton on the proper use of drugs…but decreased promotion may actually require less education to fix misperceptions left by sales representatives.
Sisyphus
Oh…and the link to the full report does not work.
Confused
So much disrespect for the pharma industry you would think that these poor docs have no will power at all. The truth is without us many people die. At this point doctor’s diagnosis and we cure.
Ed Silverman
Hi Sisyphus,
Thanks for the heads up. Sorry for the broken link. I’ve tried to fix it. Hopefully, this will work now.
Regards
ed
Mike Wokasch
Interesting comment that “promotion is not education” because the Federal Register citation states that “…the proposed rule allow VA medical professionals to become educated through promotion…” of new molecular entities. Apparently, promotion is education for some products (new) but not others.
mike@pharmareform.com
Justice in MI
“At this point doctor’s diagnosis and we cure.”
Confused–Read Jeff Kindler’s own spiel on corporate spin and the malfeasance committed within his own company.
You don’t “cure” anything if you bury studies and then advertise for indications for which there is no science whatsoever. (see Kaiser v. Pfizer, racketeering bust, witches’ brew slide, etc.)
Still confused about where distrust might come from? Jeff Kindler isn’t.
Blanket condemnations of the industry are crazy, as far as I’m concerned. So are blanket encomnia. (Look it up.)
Justice in MI
whoop. encomia.
Confused
You don’t “cure” anything if you bury studies and then advertise for indications for which there is no science whatsoever. (see Kaiser v. Pfizer, racketeering bust, witches’ brew slide, etc.)
We don’t cure followed by the statement “Blanket Condemnations of the industry are crazy” I have read this blog for awhile and the posts never focus on what the industry does positively. Not only is held to the highest standard of any industry most seem to forget we are a business, you can’t have the development without the profit motive. So is it perfect NO is better than most yes. Do we save lives, improve quality of life yes and yes. I save my distrust for lawyers and lobbyist.
pharmavet
Why do we ban drug reps but allow device reps into the operating room, where they actually assist surgeons with new technology, like orthopedic internal fixation devices, etc? I actually knew of someone who scrubbed in and inserted a new type of arterial catheter under the “watchful” eye of the surgeon.
Vetrep
What about other reps, copier, paper, vending machine reps, hospital bed reps, gauze and band aid reps. Most VA’s are way behind in medical information….most focus more on cost of meds more than efficacy or better/safer alternatives to the cheap ones.
Bruce Grant
Dear Confused,
Is English, perhaps, not your native language?
Sisyphus
Selling is not education…its selling.
Drugs that are proven to improve real outcomes significantly are quickly adopted and “sell” themselves.
yobo
Drug cos and sales reps do many good things for docs, pharmacist, nurses, hospitals, etc., but many, many times they overstep boundries and overstay their welcome and become their own worst enemies. Reps from certain cos are much more aggressive and thus annouying in their sales pitch… they don’t know when to stop. This is when they become persona non grata; their company too. Go VA, kick them out if they don’t behave!
Pharm D
Sisyphus you are SO, SO WRONG. Outcomes data in the silo world of hospitals is hardly ever used. Instead, acqusition cost is everything. Why do you think so much Vanc is still used? Outcomes data? What a joke. It’s cost alone. Vanc costs more than linezolid, tigecycline and daptomycin - has more side effects - is dosed more often - has many more drug/drug interactions - is more toxic on the kidneys and so on, yet it is the gold standard because of COST! Each of the branded products has pharmacoeconomic outcomes data from RCTs that shows less total resource allocation but they don’t get near the use as Vanc.
Don’t worry though, as each goes generic and costs fall, our administration will place them in every pathway possible in the hospital because we all know they are simply superior products. Then, when the company making the profit is in China or India, they will sell themselves.
Clint Cora, Former Pharma Sales Mgr
I think these policies should be left to the doctors rather than other administrators. After all, it’s mainly the doctors that the sales forces interact with.