AMSA Pharm-free Scorecard 2010
B State University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn - SUNY Downstate
City: New York State: NY
Commentary:

SUNY Downstate submitted a new policy to the AMSA PharmFree Scorecard after the submission deadline.  The policy submitted is primarily focused on graduate medical education. Dedicated guidance for interns, residents, and fellows is commendable. However, the submitted policies did not address several important areas in regard to faculty and staff, including allowable consulting relationships and industry funding of travel. Further, the submitted policy is very clear in prohibiting certain activities. However, its succinctness may cause confusion in some areas. For instance, while all gifts are banned for faculty, students, and trainees, "low value" gifts are conditionally allowed without clear guidance on acceptable value or nature.received a D.

 

* Please note that an evaluation of SUNY Downstate's policies was performed after the release of the 2011-12 Scorecard.  The changes are noted below.  These changes are unofficial, as they were not performed by our standard double-blinded process.  The policies will be reviewed again by AMSA's typical processes in the fall of 2012.  

 

Updates:  

This institution did not provide any new or additional for the 2012-13 AMSA PharmFree ScorecardThis institution's evaluation was last updated: 7/2/2012



Gifts & Meals 2 The acceptance of most gifts and meals is banned both on-site and off-site for individual staff, students, and trainees. However, "low cost gifts" are still allowed if they are distributed centrally. There is no dollar-amount limit to the value of these gifts, and materials promoting a specific product are discouraged in clinical areas but not explicitly banned.
Consulting relationships 1 The submitted policy does not address consulting relationships directly.
Industry-funded speaking relationships 1 While the submitted policy states that speakers' bureau participation is "strongly discouraged," there is no further guidance given on recommended standards for speaking relationships.
Disclosure 1 The submitted policy details no internal or external disclosure process for conflicts of interest.
Pharmaceutical samples 2 Pharmaceutical samples are allowed if centrally managed by the institutional pharmacy. The receipt and distribution of pharmaceutical samples by faculty and trainees is explicitly banned.
Purchasing & Formularies 3 The institution requires disclosure of conflicts of interest within the purchasing process and further requires individuals to recuse themselves from decisions in which they have "any financial interest."
Industry Sales Representatives 2 The institution's policy focuses on limiting marketing representatives' access to trainees, mandating that such interactions are supervised by faculty and occur only for educational purposes. However, the policy also appears to limit marketing interactions generally to non-patient-care areas.
On-campus Education 2 Industry-funded CME must be approved by a central CME Office that manages any funding received. ACCME standards on disclosure, conflicts of interest, and support by industry are cited. However, the institutional policy includes no further detail on measures taken to limit industry control of CME activities.
Attendance at Industry-Sponsored Lectures & Meetings Off-Campus 2 Gifts, gratuities, meals, and compensation in return for attending an off-site CME or non-CME activity are prohibited. While industry funding of travel to off-site events is not allowed for trainees, the submitted policy does not directly address industry funding of travel for faculty.
Industry Support for Scholarships & Funds for Trainees 3 All scholarships and educational funds from industry must be distributed centrally and given to recipients decided without donor involvement.
Medical school curriculum 1 The policy provided does not specify curricular approaches towards educating students about conflicts of interest.
Do the policies specify an oversight mechanism? Yes For trainees who witness violations of the institutional policy, the Associate Dean of GME is identified as the party for notification. Further, an ad hoc committee is specified as a method for investigation of such reports.
Are there explicit sanctions for noncompliance? No Formal disciplinary action for violation of this policy is stated though not specified.
What the results mean...
3Model policy
2Good progress toward model policy
1No policy, or policy unlikely to have a substantial effect on behavior
0Did not report
N/APolicy not relevant to this institution (e.g., does not make purchasing decisions)