Advertisement

Journal of Cancer Education

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 75–80 | Cite as

The Consequences of Diminishing Industry Support on the Independent Education Landscape: An Evidence-Based Analysis of the Perceived and Realistic Impact on Professional Development and Patient Care Among Oncologists

  • Caroline Robinson
  • John Ruggiero
  • Mazi Abdolrasulnia
  • B. Stephen BurtonEmail author
Article

Abstract

In recent years, commercial funding for continuing medical education (CME) has dropped significantly. Yet, little has been written about how this might affect CME in oncology, a field in which new drugs and advances emerge at a rapid pace. This study examines the role oncologists and oncology fellows say that CME plays in their ongoing professional development and their attitudes about the potential and realistic impact upon both the dissemination of medical information and the impact on patient care if commercial support were removed from CME. The study is based upon a national survey of 368 oncology clinicians (283 oncologists and 85 oncology fellows). Respondents indicated that CME is an important part of their ongoing professional development. The majority of oncologists (90 %) and oncology fellows (78 %) “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that commercial support may be more necessary for oncology than for other specialties due to the rate at which cancer therapies are introduced. Respondents felt loss of commercial support would impact cost, format, and availability of oncology CME programs. Half of oncologists thought eliminating commercial support for CME would have a negative impact on application of new therapies in oncology. Yet, both oncologists and oncology fellows were reluctant to claim the removal of commercial support would negatively affect the practice of evidence-based medicine, patient outcomes, or patient safety. A possible explanation of this apparent contradiction is found in the social sciences literature.

Keywords

Assessment Outcomes Education Medical Continuing Practice patterns Professional Oncology Medical Competence Professional Innovation diffusion 

Notes

Disclaimers

Support: this research received financial support from Genentech, Inc.

References

  1. 1.
    Carlat D (2012) Commercial support of CME biases medical education. Am Med Writ Assoc J 27(1):22Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tabas JA, Boscardin C, Jacobsen DM, Steinman MA, Volberding PA, Baron RB (2001) Clinician attitudes about commercial support of continuing medical education: results of a detailed survey. Arch Intern Med 171(9):840–846Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mazmanian PE (2009) Commercial support of continuing medical education in the United States: the politics of doubt, the value of studies. JCEHP 29(2):81–83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Morris L, Taitsman JK (2009) The agenda for continuing medical education—limiting industry’s influence. N Engl J Med 361(25):2478–2482CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Steinbrook R (2008) Financial support of continuing medical education. JAMA 299(9):1060–1062CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) (2009) Accreditation and annual report data, 2009 annual report. Available at: http://www.accme.org/sites/default/files/null/570_2009_Annual_report_20111012.pdf. Accessed December 20, 2011
  7. 7.
    Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) (2010) The Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education’s 2010 annual report: review of key findings. ACCME Almanac 33(12):6–9Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) (2011). The Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education’s 2011 annual report: review of key findings. Available at: http://www.accme.org/sites/default/files/null/630_2011_Annual_Report_20120724.pdf. Accessed June 10, 2013
  9. 9.
    Marinopoulos SS, Dorman T, Ratanawongsa N, Wilson LM, Ashar BH, Magaziner JL, Miller RG, Thomas PA, Prokopowicz GP, Qayyum R, Bass EB (2007) Effectiveness of continuing medical education. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 149 (Prepared by the Johns Hopkins Evidence-based Practice Center, under Contract No. 290-02-0018). AHRQ Publication No. 07-E006. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and QualityGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mazmanian PE, Davis DA, Galbraith R (2009) Continuing medical education effect on clinical outcomes: effectiveness of continuing medical education: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Educational Guidelines. Chest 135(3 Suppl):49S–55SCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Blayney DW (2010) Enhancing quality through innovation: American Society of Clinical Oncology presidential address 2010. JCO 28(28):4283–4288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eastman P (2008) Defending industry-supported CME. Oncol Times 30(20):5–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Parsons T (1951) The social system. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Friedson E (1970) Profession of medicine: a study of the sociology of applied knowledge. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ballmer JT (2013) The transformation of continuing medical education (CME) in the United States. Adv Med Educ Pract 4:171–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Caroline Robinson
    • 1
  • John Ruggiero
    • 2
  • Mazi Abdolrasulnia
    • 3
  • B. Stephen Burton
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.NYUSA
  2. 2.CAUSA
  3. 3.ALUSA
  4. 4.ALUSA

Personalised recommendations