Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 May 21.
Published in final edited form as: J Health Polit Policy Law. 2022 Dec 1;47(6):815–833. doi: 10.1215/03616878-10041205

Table 1:

Potential stakeholder actions to mitigate effects of physician-industry conflict of interest. DHHS, Department of Health and Human Services.

Strategic approach PREVENTION REGULATION SANCTIONS/RESTITUTION
Timing of intervention Stop conflicts from ever arising before they occur Supervise conflicts during their occurrence Penalize actors after an inappropriate conflict occurs
Examples of specific actions, and the applicable stakeholder Industry: Self-regulation to curtail types of payments empirically demonstrated to conflict with PhRMA Code’s “independence and decision-making” language
Physicians: Self-regulation to curtail the most harmful kinds of payments
Lawmakers: New legislation to prospectively prohibit industry payments
Payers: Exclude payment-accepting physicians from preferred networks
Payers: Apply additional prior authorization and step therapy requirements to non-generic prescriptions by payment-accepting physicians
DHHS, Office of Inspector General / Department of Justice: Prosecute a broader range of industry payments to physicians as illegal kickbacks and/or false claims
DHHS, Office of Inspector General: Exclude payment-accepting physicians from reimbursement through the Federal Health Care Programs