PB Handbook for Psychiatric Trainees
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Psychiatric Bulletin (2006) 30: 435-436. doi: 10.1192/pb.30.11.435-c
© 2006 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Manning, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Manning, W.
Psychiatric Bulletin (2006) 30: 435-436
© 2006 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

Correspondence

Pharmaceutical sponsorship of educational events

Winnie Manning, Consultant in Old Age Psychiatry

Roadmeetings Hospital, Carluke, Lanarkshire, Scotland, email: Winnie.manning{at}lanarkshire.scot.nhs.uk

Vassilas & Matthews (Psychiatric Bulletin, May 2006, 30, 189–191) reinforced the reasons that led me to totally change my approach to pharmaceutical sponsorship. Pharmaceutical companies may have a genuine interest in education, but should that allow them to influence prescribing? Research has shown that although they believe their own prescribing is unaffected, many doctors believe that their colleagues are influenced (Halperin et al, 2004). Vassilas & Matthews call for trusts to develop guidelines and this is essential. I believe we also need to take individual responsibility. In particular, we need to look at our education and how we fund it. We can all buy lunch and pens for ourselves, but realistically how many of us could attend big international symposia if not sponsored? Clearly that should not be the case. I have read suggestions that pharmaceutical companies with a real interest in education could contribute anonymously to a general fund for education without any payback. This is something to consider. For myself I have found I can access excellent local and online education within the scope of a National Health Service consultant budget and will continue not to see representatives of pharmaceutical companies or accept their gifts.

References

HALPERIN, E. C., HUTCHISON, P. & BARRIER, R. C. jR (2004) A population-based study of the prevalence and influence of gifts to radiation oncologists from pharmaceutical companies and medical equipment manufacturers. International Journal of Radiation Oncology and Physics, 59, 1477 –1483.





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Manning, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Manning, W.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals