Japanese physicians' perceptions of conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies: Estimating two different questioning approaches

Abstract

AbstractDespite being one of the world's largest pharmaceutical markets, interactions between Japanese physicians and pharmaceutical companies often remain opaque. Importantly, potential conflicts of interest associated with these interactions can compromise patient care and increase costs. We conducted an online survey of Japanese physicians to elucidate perspectives on pharmaceutical company promotional activities and how these influence physician prescribing patterns. Anticipating that physicians might downplay their reliance on, or the value of, pharmaceutical company‐provided information, the survey incorporated a direct questioning method and an unmatched count technique (UCT) to identify hidden perceptions on factors likely to influence prescribing. Overall, 1080 eligible physicians participated. Of these, 105 (9.7%) self‐identified as hospital directors or managers. Surprisingly, nearly twice as many participants responding to direct questioning (18.9%) versus those responding to the UCT (10.1%) asserted that information provided by pharmaceutical companies was important when prescribing medicine. Hospital directors or managers (adjusted odds ratio [adjOR] 2.56, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.00–6.54, reference = physician without title) and frequent interactions with pharmaceutical sales representatives (adjOR 5.96, 95% CI: 1.88–18.9, reference = rare interaction) significantly valued the information from sales representatives and sponsored lectures when considering prescribing decisions. Additionally, 77.1% of respondents believed that sales representatives provide fair, neutral, or relatively honest and unbiased information about their products. Few Japanese physicians acknowledged the influence of industry‐provided information on prescribing patterns. Our study uniquely applies two distinct question formats, providing a novel approach to understanding the depth of physician‐industry relationships and the effectiveness of various survey methodologies.