This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
For industry-sponsored CE, the pendulum ‘settles’
 Michael D. DePaolis |
Controversies are like pendulums. Whether it is politics, cultural trends or even who the Super Bowl favorite is, the pendulum continues to swing. Personally, I believe this is a good thing. It assures a dynamic state and a certain rigor resulting in a substantive conclusion. In short, the pendulum most often settles at a place of reason.
We certainly live the pendulum effect in clinical optometry. Whether we are talking about glaucoma, dry eye syndrome or refractive surgery, the pendulum swings. It is this point-counterpoint dialogue that results in a better understanding of disease processes and their diagnosis and treatment. To a great degree, the pendulum effect makes us better clinicians and, thereby, improves patient care.
Industry-practitioner relationship evolves
Recently, we have seen another pendulum of sorts. It involves the relationship between industry and practitioners. Organizations such as the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed) have developed their own code of ethics and compliance guidelines detailing appropriate behavior for pharmaceutical and instrument companies interacting with prescribing doctors. Long gone are the days in which a surgical device company put a kidney shaped pool in the urologist’s back yard. Today, we live in an era in which contact lens representatives cannot even leave a company logo pen behind. The pendulum continues to swing.
While this pendulum has yet to reach a point of moderation, it has made a lasting impression in certain ways, such as how corporations influence continuing education. To be compliant, companies with proprietary interests can no longer influence editorial content of a continuing education lecture. In fact, the Council on Optometric Practitioner Education’s (COPE’s) Standards for Commercial Support specifically mandates that continuing education courses not be under the control of a commercial influence. Simply put, corporate entities are no longer allowed to sponsor, develop and provide (through a contracted speaker) lectures of a proprietary nature at local, regional or national continuing education symposia. Rather, they are encouraged to provide unrestricted educational grants supporting unbiased, balanced presentations … for the sake of education.
Product-specific education occurs outside CE
Is this to say that a corporate-sponsored lecture of a product-specific nature is a bad thing? Of course not. It is largely due to the efforts of industry that research gets funded and new technologies emerge. We certainly need to learn about these new products to better serve our patients. Fortunately, there are plenty of other venues through which this can occur: sales representatives, literature, online forums and even product-specific lectures. This just cannot occur at continuing educational symposia.
In my opinion, this is a topic for which the pendulum has settled nicely.