Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

193. To ask the Minister for Health his views on recent media reports of pharmaceutical companies funding training programmes and conference attendances for doctors; if this constitutes a conflict of interest; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21812/16]

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I presume the Deputy is referring to the media report on 30 June last relating to the report published by the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association (IPHA).

I understand that the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) of which IPHA is a member, adopted a Disclosure Code regarding Transfers of Value to healthcare professionals and healthcare organisations and this came into place from 1 July 2016. Under the Code summary details of how IPHA member companies engage with and support healthcare professionals and healthcare organisations through direct or indirect financial support, or ‘Transfers of Value’, will be made public on from that date. This means that each IPHA member company and also some non-IPHA voluntary contributors will provide an annual report that includes details of supports provided to healthcare professionals and organisations related to research and development, events, donations and grants and fees for services and consultancy.

Medical research and the collaborative work of industry, healthcare organisations and healthcare professionals have a profound and positive influence on the quality of patient treatment and the value of future research. Joint research and co-operation has not only helped develop life-saving medicines but also led to advancements in patient care and medical science.

Regulation of the medical profession is undertaken by the Medical Council, the key objective of which is to ensure patient safety. We all know doctors work in a challenging environment and make decisions affecting the health and well-being of others - some decisions are indeed a matter of life or death. So at all times they have to guard against potential conflicts which would interfere with their clinical judgment. The Medical Council updated its Guide to Professional Conduct and Ethics for Registered Medical Practitionersin May this year. While the Guide is not a legal code, it sets out the principles of professional practice and conduct that all doctors registered with the Medical Council are expected to follow.

The Guide advises that doctors "should not accept gifts (including hospitality) from pharmaceutical, medical devices or other commercial enterprises". However, it further states that "This does not prevent you attending educational meetings or receiving payment of reasonable fees for professional services to commercial enterprises". The Guide directs doctors to tell patients and any other relevant party about any professional relationship they may have with pharmaceutical companies in order to show that they are acting without influence from commercial enterprise. It also gives advice on how any funding received should be channelled to avoid conflict of interest.

I view the publication of the details on funding through IPHA, which had to obtain the consent of doctors to publish their personal information, as a validation of the fact that doctors are adhering to the principles set in the Council's Guide to Professional Conduct and Ethics for Medical Practitionersand that they are transparent about any supports received. It should help to reassure patients that doctors consider that the clinical management of their patients is paramount.

If a member of the public, employers or other healthcare professionals has concerns about a doctor's fitness to practice medicine they may make a complaint about a doctor to the Medical Council, which will investigate any such complaint.