X
(All Fields are required)
Issue Brief

Pew Comments on Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services' Information Collection Activities Draft Guidance


April 8, 2013

Marilyn Tavenner
Acting Administrator
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Ave, SW
Washington, DC 20201

Re: Transparency Reports and Reporting of Physician Ownership or Investment Interests

Dear Administrator Tavenner:

The Pew Charitable Trusts appreciates this opportunity to submit comments to CMS's "Information Collection Activities" draft guidance issued on Feb. 8, 2013.

Pew is an independent, non-profit organization that applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improve public policy, inform the public and stimulate civic li fe. The Pew Prescription Project has worked to promote transparency of financial relationships between pharmaceutical and medical device makers and health care providers.

We share CMS's commitment to enhancing the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected in order to report payments or other transfers of value to covered recipients. After reviewing the three data collection templates proposed by the agency, we concluded that for the most part the documents will accurately collect the information on applicable manufacturers, transfers of value, and covered recipients as promulgated in the statute and in the final rule.

However, we suggest that both the research and non-research payment templates be modified in order to make it easier for consumers to identify which drugs, devices, biologicals, or medical supplies are associated with particular transfers of value.

Row 27 of the research and non-research templates calls for the name of associated drugs, devices, biologicals, and medical supplies in a 100-character field.1 If manufacturers list more than one product in this field, it would be difficult for consumers and other end-users to search for or sort by a specific product.

As an example of how this could become problematic, a manufacturer might produce a number of different medications and may fund a speaker program in which all of their products are discussed. In this field, several medications could be listed, and they may be listed by either their brand name, or their generic name, or both. Such a list would make it impossible to sort
payments by specific products, and would prevent end users and consumers from identifying payments associated with specific products. The inability to clearly link products with their associated transfers of value would undermine the intent behind transparency reporting and makes it difficult to determine the scope of any potential conflict of interest surrounding
particular products.

Therefore, we suggest that each data field contain only a single product, and that manufacturers be required to use more than one data field when a transfer of value is relevant to more than one product.

The Pew Charitable Trusts appreciates this opportunity to submit feedback on CMS's "Information Collection Activities" draft guidance. As the agency works to finalize its implementation guidelines around data collection, we would appreciate consideration of the recommendations provided above.

Sincerely,

Daniel Carlat, MD
Director, Pew Prescription Project
The Pew Charitable Trusts

Date added:
Apr 9, 2013

Related Resources

''Already Feeling the Heat''

Media Coverage

"The legislation requiring public disclosure of the financial relationships between healthcare vendors and physicians has been widely discussed in policy circles for years. Critics claimed payments for speaking, consulting, research or even the small trinkets and meals delivered during routine sales calls unduly influenced physician choices and inflated healthcare costs. To combat those effects, Congress required public reporting of those payments in a publicly accessible database. The legislation, labeled the Physician Payment Sunshine Act, was included in the 2010 healthcare reform law."

More

Letter from Pew to CMS Regarding Physician Payments Sunshine Act

Issue Brief

Prescription project director Danny Carlat identifies issues with the Physician Payments Sunshine Act requiring further clarification and guidance. Addressing those would ensure that manufacturers can appropriately implement the final rule, and enable consumers to benefit from transparency reports published by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

More

Advancing Integrity in Medical Education

Other Resource
The Pew Charitable Trusts is working to decrease the influence of pharmaceutical marketing on doctors’ practices. With a three-year grant from the Attorney General Consumer and Prescriber Education Grant Program, Pew is collaborating several partners to improve conflict-of-interest policies within the 158 medical schools and 400 major teaching hospitals in the United States. More

One Step Closer to Medical Transparency: Pew's Analysis of the Final Rule for the Physician Payments Sunshine Act

Other Resource
On Feb. 1, 2013, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services published the final rule guiding implementation of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which Congress passed as part of the Affordable Care Act in March 2010 to increase transparency in the relationships between physicians and drug and medical device makers. Here are some of the highlights. More

''Finding Out Who Pays Your Doctor''

Opinion

"The Obama administration issued a new rule this month that requires the makers of prescription drugs and other medical products to disclose what they pay doctors for various purposes, like consulting or speaking on behalf of the manufacturer. This overdue rule adds much-needed weight to previous, more limited disclosure requirements."

More