Volume 67, Numéro 4, Juillet-Août 2012
|Page(s)||289 - 294|
|Section||Bonnes pratiques / Good Practices|
|Publié en ligne||1 novembre 2012|
Conflicts of Interests in the Area of Healthcare Products and Technology. Current State of Affairs and Recommendations
1 Department of Pharmacovigilance,
Pierre-Fabre Laboratory, Boulogne-Billancourt, France
2 AP-HP Pitié-Salpêtrière, UPMC, Department of Pharmacology, Paris, France
3 CHU and Bordeaux UniversityDepartment of Pharmacology, Bordeaux, France
Correspondence and offprints: Jean-Paul Demarez, Department of Pharmacovigilance, Pierre-Fabre Laboratory, 45 place Abel Gance, 92654 Boulogne Cedex, France. Email: email@example.com
Accepted: 4 June 2012
The handling of conflicts of interest in the area of healthcare products and technology has become a major issue for all of those involved in healthcare. Round Table N°4 at the Giens Workshops 2011 has put forward concrete proposals to clarify and optimise the handling of conflicts of interest.
Conflicts of interest cannot be defined by the individuals consulted or applying for funds since each institution, whether public or private, that puts out a call for projects or that requests advice, analyses or expert testimony in the healthcare field has different degrees of what it defines as a conflict of interest, depending on the context of the proposal or specific request that it puts out. In contrast, each individual has ties of personal interest that can and must be openly disclosed. The ties are much more diverse than what is commonly found in the conflict of interest statements of large institutions operating in the healthcare field and are not limited to financial and operational ties between companies and individuals. In addition, the statements are difficult to manage because of their sheer number.
The Round Table recommends that each individual should openly disclose all of his or her ties of personal interest in a Single Statement of Ties of personal Interest (SSTI). The SSTI would be updated regularly and accessible on line. Each institution could then determine whether or not the reported ties represent a conflict in the context of the mission proposed. Each institution could publish in advance the conditions that would give rise to a conflict and, in this way, an individual could refrain from applying for the mission.
Other practical approaches to handling conflicts of interest were put forward.
Key words: interest links / experts / impartiality
© 2012 Société Française de Pharmacologie et de Thérapeutique