The Association Between Industry Payments to Authors and the Results of Studies Evaluating Nerve Repair
Yadira Villalvazo*1, Yusuf Surucu1, Kacey Marra1, Goitz Robert2, Teun Teunis1
1Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; 2Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
The collaboration between physicians and industry has led to significant advances in the use of nerve grafts and conduits. However, despite their popularity, there currently are no randomized studies supporting their use. This might indicate that other factors contribute to their popularity, such as industry sponsorship. We tested the hypothesis that there is no association between industry nerve-repair-specific-payments per article and reported 2-point discrimination (2PD), MRC sensory, MRC motor or monofilament testing.
A systemic literature review in PubMed from 2005-2023 was conducted for clinical studies that reported nerve injury and the use of allografts or conduits. Amount of industry payments made to each author was extracted from the OpenPaymentsData website. Of the 26 articles identified, 20 met inclusion criteria. 100% (20/20) of articles had least one author who received payment. Average nerve-repair-specific-payments/article, defined as the cumulative payments received by all authors of an article, was $314,471 (range $103 - $1,315,645), or a mean of $74,424/author.
Articles that reported 2PD equal or better than the average had an average industry payment of $14,444/author +/-13,733. Articles with worse outcomes had $152,481/author +/-172,564 (p >0.5). Articles that reported MR equal or better than the average had an average industry payment of $71,818/author +/-57,854.37. Articles with worse outcomes had $224,577/author +/-200,432 (p >0.5). Of the 8 articles with below average outcomes, only 1 article did not support the use of allografts or conduits.
The relationship between physicians and industry is evident, with many researchers receiving some form of payment. Although payments are significant, our study does not suggest that it influences outcomes. However, in articles where outcomes were less than the average, conclusions still supported the use of allografts and conduits. This proposes that although study results are not directly connected to industry payments, a bias can still influence the overall recommendation by an author.
Back to 2023 Abstracts