The Irish Mail on Sunday

UNLIKE HERE, DR REGINA FARRELL’S PATIENTS IN UPSTATE NEW YORK CAN SEE IF SHE’S BEEN PAID... WITH THE CLICK OF A MOUSE

- By Michael O’Farrell INVESTIGAT­IONS EDITOR

PATIENTS at New York physician Regina A Farrell’s practice in Syracuse can be certain she is fully transparen­t when it comes to payments she may have received from drugs companies.

That’s because in America – unlike Ireland – there is nothing to hide and everything is above board and seen to be so. This transparen­cy is ensured by the fact every US doctor can be searched by name in America’s Open Payment Database.

But this is not possible in Ireland, where more than 600 doctors who receive valuable benefits from pharmaceut­ical firms remain secret.

In the US, things are straightfo­rward. In a couple of clicks, patients of Dr Farrell can see exactly what pharmaceut­ical firms spent on her.

In 2022, for example Abbvie Inc bought food and beverages for Dr Farrell on two occasions to a combined value of $31.55 (€29). Every cent

Abbvie spends on doctors in the US is transparen­t and public by default.

In the Open Payment Database, all such expenditur­e is listed clearly under headings such as food and beverage charitable contributi­ons, guest speaker fees, education grants, entertainm­ent, travel and lodging. Even debt forgivenes­s – to the doctor or their immediate family – is declared.

The Irish system is very different. Here, it is not mandatory to declare benefits received from drugs firms.

The number of medical profession­als who do consent to being named is rising and now stands at 79% – but hundreds of doctors who receive close to a €1m between them still remain anonymous.

According to the voluntary database run by the Irish Pharmaceut­ical Healthcare Associatio­n

(IPHA), Abbvie made transfers of value to 93 doctors in Ireland, whose identity remains secret. They shared €186,543 – an average of €2,005 each. That figure is significan­tly more than a coffee and a snack. In fact it’s more akin to the amount many firms spend bringing doctors to conference­s in foreign climes. There are dozens of

named Irish-based doctors in the latest IPHA declaratio­n who have declared that they received ‘travel and accommodat­ion’ from drugs firms of about this amount. But doctors can still choose to keep this secret and hundreds do.

Instead of transparen­cy, what Ireland has, in the words of a Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland study, is a system that is ‘completely obfuscated’. In the Irish declaratio­ns, research payments are shown in aggregated form, with no entities or individual­s named.

The RCSI study states: ‘Only a total value for research payments made to doctors and health facilities is disclosed per company, with no details of the number of payments or recipients. Though such funding may be disclosed if research reaches publicatio­n, this would be long after the payment and publicatio­ns rarely disclose the amount of funding.’

Even the data presented on those doctors and healthcare organisati­ons, identified as the beneficiar­ies of payments in the Irish system, can be impossible to decipher. So say RCSI experts who reviewed the system in 2021 and whose study, published in the Health Policy journal, showed a system of self-regulation is hardly transparen­t. The study stated: ‘An opt-out clause, along with provision of user-unfriendly data appear to be the norm when industry self-regulates.’ Only the last three years’ of data from Ireland’s voluntary system is up on transferof­value.ie – the IPHA’s transparen­cy database, and so those who want a better picture must scrape the site’s data before it disappears and save it to compare to future years.

The Irish Mail on Sunday has done this since the site went live in 2016. So did the RSCI team.

But for that, this data, everything before 2020, would now be gone. Because we saved this data, we can show that since the system was launched in 2016 Abbvie has spent €1,463,529 on payments to doctors that remain completely secret.

Last night an Abbvie spokesman told the MoS it supports disclosure of all partnershi­ps and ‘advocates for transparen­cy on all transfers of value to healthcare profession­als.’

Another userunfrie­ndly aspect of the Irish site is that the data is inaccessib­le to search engines. It is contained in

50 or so individual reports by company name for each of the three years available. Each report for each company, for each year, must be viewed separately from the rest. There is no way of easily cross-checking which doctors or organisati­ons got payments from different firms.

In their study, the RCSI academics documented ‘various data errors, and significan­t variation between companies in their methodolog­y, notes and disclosure­s, with inconsiste­nt approaches to identifyin­g individual­s, and aggregatio­n and exclusion of payments’. They also found breaches of the industry’s own voluntary code. In one case, a firm excluded all payments under €100 from disclosure.

This error was corrected, but the identity of the company kept secret. By contrast, in the US that same firm would have to report spending on every last latte.

 ?? ??
 ?? ??
 ?? ??
 ?? ??
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Ireland