Abstract
Background
Although the sudden coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic would have significantly influenced financial relationships between the healthcare industry and gastroenterologists and hepatologists, little is known about the trend in financial relations in the United States. This study, thus, aimed to examine the trends in industry payments made to gastroenterologists and hepatologists during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Materials and methods
Using the Open Payments Database between 2013 and 2021, we evaluated trends in financial relationships between the healthcare industry and gastroenterologists and hepatologists in the United States. Trends in general payments during the COVID-19 pandemic were evaluated by interrupted time series analysis with monthly and yearly payments at the physician level.
Results
A total of 16,808 or 89.4% of all active gastroenterologists received general payments totaling $393,823,094 from the pharmaceutical and medical device companies between 2013 and 2021. The payment per gastroenterologist and the number of gastroenterologists receiving payments decreased by 70.9% (95% CI: -73.4% - -68.1%, p<0.001) and by 51.5% (95%CI: -52.2% - -50.7%, p<0.001) due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, respectively. However, both payments and the number of physicians with payments have recovered monthly since the COVID-19 pandemic, with relative monthly change rates of 4.1% (95% CI: 3.5% ‒ 4.7%, p<0.001) and 3.2% (95%CI: 3.1% ‒ 3.2%, p<0.001). Additionally, the general payments per gastroenterologist significantly decreased by 2.5% (95%CI: -3.9% - -1.1%, p<0.001) each year before the COVID-19 pandemic, while there was a very small change in the number of gastroenterologists with payments.
Conclusions
The industry payments to gastroenterologists and hepatologists significantly decreased due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the payments have recovered right after the pandemic in the United States.
Keywords: industry payment, open payments database, conflict of interest, covid-19, gastroenterologists and hepatologists
Introduction
A widespread and sometimes strong financial relationship between the healthcare industry and gastroenterologists and hepatologists has been repeatedly reported in the United States [1-3]. Gastroenterology and hepatology is one of the specialties with the largest number of physicians and demand in the United States. One recent study found 87.7% of gastroenterologists received one or more non-research payments between 2014 and 2020 [4]. The study reported that total non-research payments including food and beverage, speaking fees, consulting fees, and travel and accommodation fees, increased by 11.4% each year between 2014 and 2016. Then, total payments decreased by 5.8% from 2016 to 2019.
The restriction on people’s social activities due to the sudden and urgent onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic might have reduced opportunities for promotional activities by the industries and consequently financial relationships with industries among the gastroenterologists in the United States [5]. A recent study reported that the non-research payments from the healthcare industry to physicians decreased by 48.4% in 2020 [5]. However, no study has assessed the trend in industry payments specifically among gastroenterologists and hepatologists during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.
Materials and methods
Study design and study participants
Using the public payment database, the Open Payment Database, this cross-sectional study examined the trend in general payments made by the healthcare industries to all active gastroenterologists and hepatologists between August 2013 and December 2021 in the United States.
Data collection
The general payments to gastroenterologists and hepatologists were extracted by following steps. First, we sorted all physicians who specialized in gastroenterology and hepatology (“Allopathic & Osteopathic Physicians|Internal Medicine|Gastroenterology” “Allopathic & Osteopathic Physicians|Internal Medicine|Hepatology” and “Allopathic & Osteopathic Physicians|Petiatrics|Pediatric Gastroenterology”) in the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System (NPPES) database. Second, we extracted the profile data of all gastroenterologists and hepatologists who were continuously active between August 2013 and December 2021 from the NPPES database. Finally, we extracted all general payments between August 2013 and December 2021 from the Open Payments Database by matching the physicians' National Provider Identifier (NPI) numbers, which we extracted from the NPPES database. The Open Payments Database first released the payment data in August 2013 and the latest payment data was in 2021. Therefore, we used all the available payment data for this analysis. The general payments were made to physicians for non-research and non-ownership purposes, including meals, lecturing compensations, consulting fees, travel and accommodation fees, and education fees.
Data analyses
Descriptive analyses were conducted for payment data each year and overall. To evaluate the trend in payments, the interrupted time series analysis with the panel-data of monthly payments per physician was performed using the population-averaged generalized estimating equation models (GEE) [6]. The yearly trends in payment per gastroenterologist and the number of gastroenterologists with payments were also evaluated by the population-averaged GEE models, and the yearly trends in total payment values and contracts were evaluated by the linear regression models. As the payments were not normally distributed, the negative binomial GEE model for payments per physician and linear log-linked GEE model with the Poisson distribution for the number of physicians with payments were employed, as we noted previously [7-9]. As the national emergency was declared on March 13, 2020, in the United States, we considered the period before and after March 2020 as before the COVID-19 pandemic and during the pandemic. Predictor variables included the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, month of payment, month since the COVID-19 pandemic, and monthly variables to adjust the monthly trend in payment patterns. Additionally, the USD (United States Dollar) inflation rate was adjusted by dividing the inflation rate by the consumer price index for each month, relative to August 2013. All analyses were performed using Microsoft Excel for Microsoft 365 MSO, version 2202 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, United States), and Stata Statistical Software: Release 17 (2021; StataCorp LLC, College Station, Texas, United States). P-values were statistically significant at 0.05.
Ethical clearance
The Ethics Committee of the Medical Governance Research Institute, Tokyo Japan, approved this study. Informed consent from the participants was waived by the Ethics Committee of the Medical Governance Research Institute, as this study was a cross-sectional study of the public database.
Results
A total of 16,808 (89.4% of all active gastroenterologists and hepatologists) received general payments totaling $393,823,094 and 3,061,232 contracts from pharmaceutical and medical device companies between 2013 and 2021 (Table 1). Median monthly payments per gastroenterologist receiving payments were $62.46 (interquartile range (IQR): $26.4-$127.76) before the COVID-19 pandemic and $53.04 (IQR: $23.29-$116.915) during the pandemic. The payments per gastroenterologist and number of gastroenterologists receiving payments declined by 70.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): -73.4% - -68.1%, p<0.001) and by 51.5% (95%CI: -52.2% - -50.7%, p<0.001) at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, respectively (Figure 1 and Table 2). However, both payments and the number of physicians with payments have recovered monthly since the COVID-19 pandemic, with relative monthly change rates of 4.1% (95%CI: 3.5%‒4.7%, p<0.001) and 3.2% (95%CI: 3.1%‒3.2%, p<0.001). We found small decreasing trends by 0.2% (95%CI: -0.3% - -0.1%, p<0.001) in monthly payments per gastroenterologist and by 0.03% (95%CI: -0.05 - -0.01, p<0.001) in the number of gastroenterologists receiving payments before the COVID-19 pandemic.
Table 1. Summary of annual general payments made to gastroenterologists and hepatologists between 2013 and 2021 in the United States.
*P<0.05, **P<0.01, P<0.001
a Only physicians receiving payments each year were included for average and median calculations; b The payments in 2013 were excluded from the trend analysis, as the payments in 2013 were partially disclosed between August and December. Relative annual changes in the variables were reported as a relative percentage; c Relative differences of each variable between 2020 and 2021 compared to those averaging between 2014 and 2019 were reported as a relative percentage; d Relative annual changes in the variables were reported as a relative percentage
CI: confidence interval; IQR: interquartile range; SD: standard deviation
| Variables | Year | Relative change rate (95% CI), % | Overall | ||||||||||
| 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | Annual change between 2014-2019b | 2014-2019 vs 2020-2021c | Annual change between 2020-2021d | ||
| Total payments, $ | 20,694,039.71 | 51,560,718.78 | 51,878,375.68 | 59,170,058.27 | 58,395,718.32 | 52,299,128.91 | 48,310,907.09 | 22,584,510.73 | 28,929,636.81 | 393,823,094 | |||
| Number of physicians with payments, n | 11,175 (59.4) | 12,686 (67.5) | 13,339 (70.9) | 13,400 (71.3) | 13,280 (70.6) | 13,164 (70.0) | 12,592 (67.0) | 10,335 (55.0) | 10,603 (56.4) | -0.2 (-0.4 – -0.1)* | -22.5 (-23.9 – -21.1)*** | 2.8 (1.7 – 4.0)*** | 16,808 |
| Payments per phyisician, $ | |||||||||||||
| Median (IQR) | 226 (94–532) | 456 (149–1,197) | 410 (125–1,113) | 469 (133–1,232) | 441 (130–1,175) | 455 (133–1,178) | 415 (125–1,128) | 227 (72–656) | 371 (102–1,135) | -2.5 (-3.9 – -1.1)** | -65.4 (-68.6 – -61.8)*** | 25.5 (18.7 – 32.7)*** | 2,752 (706–8,182) |
| Average (SD) | 1,852 (8,098) | 4,064 (21,910) | 3,889 (19,080) | 4,416 (19,647) | 4,397 (19,450) | 3,973 (17,921) | 3,837 (17,058) | 2,185 (9,745) | 2,728 (10,960) | 23,431 (108,181) | |||
| Range | 0.96–272,956 | 2.67–1,187,662 | 0.03–476,283 | 0.03–409,986 | 0.03–447,471 | 0.78–494,666 | 0.78–463,529 | 0.83–293,052 | 0.48–237,568 | 0.03–3.013,848 | |||
Table 2. Relative monthly change rate in payments per gastroenterologist and number of gastroenterologists with payments before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
*p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001
Relative monthly change in each variable was reported as a relative percentage
COVID-19: coronavirus disease 2019
| Variables | Relative monthly change rates, % (95% confidence interval) | |
| Payment per gastroenterologist | Number of gastroenterologists with payments | |
| Before the COVID-19 | -0.2 (-0.3 ‒ -0.1)*** | -0.03 (-0.05 - -0.01)*** |
| The COVID-19 pandemic onset | -70.9 (-73.4 ‒ -68.1)*** | -51.5 (-52.2 - -50.7)*** |
| During the COVID-19 pandemic | 4.1 (3.5 ‒ 4.7)*** | 3.2 (3.1 - 3.2)*** |
| Month | ||
| January | Ref. | Ref. |
| February | 21.3 (15.7 ‒ 27.2)*** | 2.0 (1.5 - 2.6)*** |
| March | 79.2 (70.2 ‒ 88.7)*** | 12.6 (12.0 - 13.2)*** |
| April | 32.3 (25.6 ‒ 39.4)*** | 4.1 (3.5 - 4.6)*** |
| May | 37.6 (30.6 ‒ 44.9)*** | 5.2 (4.6 - 5.8)*** |
| June | 42.3 (34.9 ‒ 50.1)*** | 4.6 (4.0 - 5.2)*** |
| July | 11.5 (5.6 ‒ 17.8)*** | 0.3 (-0.2 - 0.9) |
| August | 14.4 (8.9 ‒ 20.2)*** | 3.6 (3.0 - 4.1)*** |
| September | 29.0 (22.2 - 36.2)*** | 3.7 (3.1 - 4.2)*** |
| October | 54.3 (46.7 - 62.2)*** | 8.0 (7.4 - 8.5)*** |
| November | 39.6 (32.6 - 47.0)*** | 4.1 (3.5 - 4.7)*** |
| December | 34.2 (21.6 - 48.2)*** | -2.4 (-2.9 - -1.9)*** |
Figure 1. Monthly general payments per physician and number of gastroenterologists and hepatologists with payments before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.
A: Trend in the monthly general payments per gastroenterologist and hepatologist before and during the COVID-19 pandemic; B: Trend in the monthly number of gastroenterologists and hepatologists receiving general payments before and during the COVID-19 pandemic
COVID-19: coronavirus disease 2019
Regarding the analysis based on yearly payments, the number of gastroenterologists with payments did not change by year before the COVID-19 pandemic, ranging from 12,592 (67.0% of all gastroenterologists and hepatologists) in 2019 to 13,400 (71.3%) in 2016 (Table 1). The payments per gastroenterologist decreased from $469 (IQR: $133-$1,232) in 2016 to $415 (IQR: $125-$1,128) in 2019, with a relative annual change rate of -2.5% (95%CI: -3.9% - -1.1%, p=0.001). In 2020, 10,335 (55.0%) gastroenterologists and hepatologists received a total of $22,584,511 in general payments. The median per-physician payments were $227 (IQR: $72-$656), while average payments were $2,185 (standard deviation: $9,745) in 2020. The annual payments per gastroenterologist and number of gastroenterologists declined by 65.4% (95%CI: -68.6% - -61.8%, p<0.001) and by 22.5% (95%CI: -23.9% - -21.1%, p<0.001) in 2020, compared to those between 2014 and 2019, respectively. Additionally, 10,603 (56.4%) gastroenterologists and hepatologists received one or more general payments with $371 (IQR: $102-$1,135) in median in 2021. The per-physician payments and the number of gastroenterologists receiving general payments increased by 25.5% (95%CI: 18.7% - 32.7%, p<0.001) and 2.8% (95%CI: 1.7% - 4.0%, p<0.001), respectively (Table 1). These findings were consistent with the findings from the monthly analysis.
Discussion
This analysis of monthly payment trends shows that the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States significantly contributed to the sudden decrease in general payments to gastroenterologists and hepatologists by less than half, in both payment amounts and the number of recipients. The decrease in non-research payments from the healthcare industry to healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic is described in several specialties. Inoue et al. found that the total general payments to physicians in 2020 reduced by 40-44% compared to that in 2018 and 2019 [4]. The non-research payments per internal medicine physician were reduced by 45.8% during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, per-physician payments to allergists and clinical immunologists decreased by 52.6% and the number of allergists and clinical immunologists receiving payments also decreased by 36.9% due to the COVID-19 pandemic [8]. The number of infectious diseases physicians and per-physician payments to infectious diseases physicians also decreased by 58.6% and 54.4% during the COVID-19 pandemic, respectively [7]. This study adds to the evidence that physician-industry financial relationships were also restricted in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology due to the pandemic.
However, we also observed that there were increasing trends in payments and the number of gastroenterologists receiving payments right after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Several studies reported that while the payments for meals and travel remained low, speaking compensations and consulting payments were less influenced and have recovered after the pandemic [4,8]. The reduction in non-research payments by industry is therefore likely to be temporary due to the unexpected and urgent COVID-19 pandemic and could recover to the same extent as before the pandemic.
Before the pandemic, Marshall et al. reported that the number of physicians accepting payments declined every year, as the percentage of all United State physicians receiving payments decreased by 13.8% overall and by 3.5% each year between 2014 and 2018 [9]. This decreasing trend was also observed in other specialties such as oncology, with a 4.9% annual decrease in the number of oncologists with payments [10]. However, our study elucidated that such a decrease in the number of physicians accepting payments was not observed among gastroenterologists and hepatologists between 2014 and 2019. Meanwhile, there was a decreasing trend in payment amounts between 2014 and 2019, possibly indicating a shift in companies' financing activities from non-research payments to research payments [11].
Owing to the Open Payments program inception, numerous studies demonstrated the non-research payments to physicians from the healthcare industry increased physicians’ prescriptions of brand-name drugs over generic alternatives and increased healthcare costs [12]. The drugs intensively promoted by the healthcare industry were sometimes lower in safety and efficacy, leading to low-quality prescriptions in the United States [12-15]. Although most physicians assume that industry payments and small gifts do not influence their clinical practice [16,17], accumulating evidence shows the financial interaction between physicians and the healthcare industry negatively influences patient care. Ideally, all physicians, including gastroenterologists and hepatologists, should decline to accept the non-research payments including meals and small gifts from the healthcare industry.
This study included several limitations. First, this study only included general payments. Second, the study included only gastroenterologists and hepatologists receiving general payments. Third, although the physicians can review and dispute the possible inaccuracies in the payment database listed in the Open Payments Database, only a small number of physicians disputed the payment data [18,19]. Therefore, there were possible inaccuracies in the Open Payments Database. However, the inclusion of all gastroenterologists with payments could evaluate the whole magnitude and trend in non-research payments from pharmaceutical and medical device companies in the United States.
Conclusions
Non-research payments to gastroenterologists and hepatologists from the healthcare industry decreased by more than half due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. However, the recovering trends in the non-research industry payments right after the pandemic indicates the sudden decrease in the payments was temporal.
The content published in Cureus is the result of clinical experience and/or research by independent individuals or organizations. Cureus is not responsible for the scientific accuracy or reliability of data or conclusions published herein. All content published within Cureus is intended only for educational, research and reference purposes. Additionally, articles published within Cureus should not be deemed a suitable substitute for the advice of a qualified health care professional. Do not disregard or avoid professional medical advice due to content published within Cureus.
The authors have declared financial relationships, which are detailed in the next section.
Hiroaki Saito declare(s) personal fees from Taiho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd . Akihiko Ozaki Tetsuya Tanimoto declare(s) personal fees from Medical Network Systems. Tetsuya Tanimoto declare(s) personal fees from Bionics Co. Ltd. Hiroaki Saito declare(s) non-financial support from gastroenterologist board-certified by the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology.
Human Ethics
Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Ethics Committee of the Medical Governance Research Institute, Tokyo Japan issued approval MG2018-04-20200605 dated June 5, 2020. As this study is a retrospective analysis of the publicly available information, informed consent was waived by the Ethics Committee
Animal Ethics
Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue.
References
- 1.Assessment of pharmaceutical company and device manufacturer payments to gastroenterologists and their participation in clinical practice guideline panels. Nusrat S, Syed T, Nusrat S, Chen S, Chen WJ, Bielefeldt K. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1:0. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.6343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Evaluation of industry relationships among authors of clinical practice guidelines in gastroenterology. Combs TR, Scott J, Jorski A, Heavener T, Vassar M. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178:1711–1712. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4730. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Are clinical practice guidelines for hepatitis C by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and Infectious Diseases Society of America evidence based? Financial conflicts of interest and assessment of quality of evidence and strength of recommendations (Letter to the Editor) Murayama A, Ozaki A, Saito H, Sawano T, Tanimoto T. https://aasldpubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hep.32262. Hepatology. 2022;75:1052–1054. doi: 10.1002/hep.32262. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Changes in industry marketing payments to physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic: quasi experimental, difference-in-difference study. Inoue K, Figueroa JF, Kondo N, Tsugawa Y. BMJ Medicine. 2022;1:219. doi: 10.1136/bmjmed-2022-000219. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series studies in medication use research. Wagner AK, Soumerai SB, Zhang F, Ross-Degnan D. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2002;27:299–309. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2710.2002.00430.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Pharmaceutical payments to Japanese certified hematologists: a retrospective analysis of personal payments from pharmaceutical companies between 2016 and 2019. Kusumi E, Murayama A, Kamamoto S, et al. Blood Cancer J. 2022;12:54. doi: 10.1038/s41408-022-00656-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Trend in industry payments to infectious disease physicians in the United States: a seven-year analysis of nonresearch payments from the Open Payments Database between 2014 and 2020. Murayama A, Nakano K, Kamamoto S, Sato M, Saito H, Tanimoto T, Ozaki A. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2022.07.023. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2022;28:1655–1654. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2022.07.023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Industry payments to allergists and clinical immunologists in the United States during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Murayama A, Kamamoto S, Saito H, Tanimoto T, Ozaki A. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2022;129:635–636. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2022.08.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Trends in industry payments to physicians in the United States From 2014 to 2018. Marshall DC, Tarras ES, Rosenzweig K, Korenstein D, Chimonas S. JAMA. 2020;324:1785–1788. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.11413. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Trends in industry payments to medical oncologists in the United States since the inception of the Open Payments Program, 2014 to 2019. Tarras ES, Marshall DC, Rosenzweig K, Korenstein D, Chimonas S. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7:440–444. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.6591. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Medical marketing in the United States, 1997-2016. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. JAMA. 2019;321:80–96. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.19320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Are financial payments from the pharmaceutical industry associated with physician prescribing?: a systematic review. Mitchell AP, Trivedi NU, Gennarelli RL, et al. Ann Intern Med. 2021;174:353–361. doi: 10.7326/M20-5665. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Association between gifts from pharmaceutical companies to French general practitioners and their drug prescribing patterns in 2016: retrospective study using the French Transparency in Healthcare and National Health Data System databases. Goupil B, Balusson F, Naudet F, Esvan M, Bastian B, Chapron A, Frouard P. BMJ. 2019;367:0. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Payments from drug companies to physicians are associated with higher volume and more expensive opioid analgesic prescribing. Zezza MA, Bachhuber MA. PLoS One. 2018;13:0. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Industry payments to physician specialists who prescribe repository corticotropin. Hartung DM, Johnston K, Cohen DM, Nguyen T, Deodhar A, Bourdette DN. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1:0. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.0482. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Interactions between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry generally and sales representatives specifically and their association with physicians' attitudes and prescribing habits: a systematic review. Fickweiler F, Fickweiler W, Urbach E. BMJ Open. 2017;7:0. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016408. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Information from pharmaceutical companies and the quality, quantity, and cost of physicians' prescribing: a systematic review. Spurling GK, Mansfield PR, Montgomery BD, Lexchin J, Doust J, Othman N, Vitry AI. PLoS Med. 2010;7:0. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Exploring the industry-dermatologist financial relationship: insight from the Open Payment Data. Feng H, Wu P, Leger M. JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152:1307–1313. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.3037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Scope and nature of financial conflicts of interest between neurologists and industry: 2013-2016. Robbins NM, Meyer MJ, Bernat JL. Neurology. 2019;93:438–449. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

