4.6 Article

Does the Open Payments Database Provide Sunshine on Neurosurgery?

Journal

NEUROSURGERY
Volume 79, Issue 6, Pages 933-938

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000001417

Keywords

Conflicts of interest; Public policy; Transparency

Funding

  1. DePuy Synthes
  2. Zimmer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: The Open Payments Database (OPD) was launched by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in 2014. Through this online searchable database, the public can explore physician-industry interactions. To date, there is no published literature on the accuracy of the database for neurosurgeons or any physician specialty. OBJECTIVE: To study the accuracy of published records and scope of industry-neurosurgeon relationships between neurosurgeons and industry within the OPD. METHODS: We searched 4.3 million records in 2013 and 11.41 million records in 2014 in the OPD for board-certified neurosurgeons verified by the American Board of Neurological Surgery. Delimit software was used to condense these data, Microsoft Access for database queries, and STATA to perform descriptive analyses. RESULTS: Of the 3240 neurosurgeons in the OPD in 2013, 2020 were identified correctly as neurosurgeons within the database (62%). Of the 3593 neurosurgeons in the OPD in 2014, 2433 were identified correctly as neurosurgeons (68%). Within the OPD in 2013, there were 72 066 attributed records for neurosurgeons; within the 2014 OPD, there were 160 563 attributed records for neurosurgeons. Total payments to neurosurgeons in 2013 (for the 9 months published in OPD): $61 802 659.37; in 2014: $117 127 824.00. CONCLUSION: The OPD details physician interactions with industry and has multiple inaccuracies. Publicly availing inaccurate information through a searchable governmental website that can be accessed by patients and journalists alike has the potential to tarnish individual neurosurgeons and undermine professional credibility.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available