• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

MassDevice

The Medical Device Business Journal — Medical Device News & Articles | MassDevice

  • Latest News
    • Cardiovascular
    • Orthopedics
  • Wall Street Beat
    • Funding Roundup
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Podcasts & Webinars
    • Podcasts
    • Webinars
  • Resources
    • About MassDevice
    • Newsletter Signup
    • Leadership in Medtech
    • Manufacturers & Suppliers Search
    • MedTech 100 Index
    • Videos
    • Whitepapers
  • DeviceTalks Tuesdays
  • Coronavirus: Live updates
Home » Banned in Boston

Banned in Boston

April 6, 2009 By Chris Markuns

Pharma is sexy. Big drugs, big money, big news. In the life sciences arena, perhaps only biotech commands a higher political and public profile.

So it isn’t surprising that the medical device industry’s groundbreaking inclusion in Massachusetts’ new code of conduct garnered relatively little attention.

But the new rules governing industry payments to physicians — the so-called “gift ban” — include provisions aimed at curbing what some call undue and improper influence by medical device manufacturers.

Finalized March 11 by the state Department of Public Health’s Public Health Council, the toughest-in-the-nation policy aims to lower healthcare costs by forcing companies to reduce the amount spent on marketing.

That means no more meals outside of a presentation or hospital setting — and spouses should plan on brown-bagging it, as paying for their meals is over too. It means no gifts or payments of any kind — say good bye to the promotional pen — and no covering doctors’ continuing medical education expenses.

The policy also aims to make the life sciences industry more transparent, by mandating that companies divulge to the public how much they spend and what — or who — they spend it on. Companies must report the “value, nature, purpose and particular recipient of any fee, payment, subsidy or other economic benefit with a value of over $50.”

Although the regulations cover much of the same ground as similar laws in a handful of other states, they also make Massachusetts the first to include medical device manufacturers in the ban on certain payments to healthcare practitioners, the first to mandate financial disclosure from medical device companies and the only state to require disclosing handouts of demonstration and evaluation units.

And, predictably, more ink was spilled over the extinction of promotional doodads and a-la-carte steakhouse dinners.

Less expected is what the new rules and the eight-month battle over them seem to say about the relationship between the industry and a state in which it’s long been an economic linchpin.

Namely, that they have a lot to learn about each other.

Under the radar

Medical device leaders complain that the Public Health Council didn’t fully grasp medical device sales and marketing practices. They remain unsure of the exact impact of the new rules will be. And the healthcare consumer advocates who pushed for the rules admit that, compared to the drug industry, they don’t know the medical device world particularly well.

Both sides expect that in the year before the state comes back to the table to review the rules — a year earlier than originally planned — everyone will get an education.

“There’s a lot we don’t know about [the medical device industry],” says Georgia Maheras, coordinator for Healthcare for All’s Massachusetts Prescription Reform Coalition and one of the drivers behind the tougher regulations. When the mandatory annual disclosure reports go up on the Department of Public Health’s website – searchable by company and health care provider — Maheras’s will be among the first mouse clicks you hear.

“We’re really interested to see some of the data that comes out in the next few years,” she says, “to see how it affects [the medical device industry].”

{IMAGELEFT:http://www.massdevice.com/sites/default/wp-content/uploads/headshots/Sommer_Thomas_100x100.jpg}That lack of familiarity is distressingly apparent in the regulations, according to Tom Sommer, president of the Massachusetts Medical Device Industry Council (MassMEDIC).

“This whole process has been very disappointing, despite putting in the time explaining [to the Public Health Council] what makes us different,” Sommer says. “I think it’s easier for people to lump medical device in with pharma, rather than differentiate.”

Ask him about the new rules and the first sentence out if his mouth begins with, “We’re concerned about…” The next 10 or so start with, “We’re also concerned about…”

Sommer argues that developing medical device technology requires far greater interaction with healthcare practitioners than most people realize. The industry is worried how that “free flow of information” will be hampered by fears of, say, an illegal meal with a medical device rep and a doctor.

And while he agrees there’s a need for transparency and says there are concessions that improve the final draft, “our concern is that a lot of pre-sales kicking of the tires that goes on won’t be allowed under these regulations,” he says.

{IMAGELEFT:http://www.massdevice.com/sites/default/wp-content/uploads/headshots/Coughlin_Robert_100x100.jpg}For instance, the new rules bar any reimbursement for technical training prior to executing a sales contract. Much of the collaboration that isn’t restricted or banned outright will be made public, creating a distinct competitive disadvantage against companies in other states, says Robert Coughlin, president and CEO of the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council. That’s especially worrisome, he adds, as the medical device industry moves toward “combination products” featuring a biological or pharmaceutical product delivered in a device.

“In order to develop these devices, there is a terrific amount of collaboration between physicians and companies that will now need to be disclosed,” Coughlin explains.

Those deeper, more elaborate ties are a good example of the need for more regulation, not less, Maheras argues. Whereas the pharma dealers tend to be the “pretty cheerleader” handing out drug samples and trinkets, she explains, medical device marketing can involve large, expensive demo units and rebates that “read like kickbacks.”

“They’re doing some things in which the potential conflict of interest is a little worse,” Maheras says, adding that tighter relationships between industry and physicians offer more chances to cross ethical lines.

An upside?

Some believe a nationwide trend toward tighter regulation — along with a growing list of states with laws, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act of 2007 is creeping along in Washington — should be seen as an opening for the medical device industry.

“This is a great opportunity for a company to say, ‘Look at us. Look at our charitable giving, look at all the good work we’re doing,'” says Maheras.

For an example of getting ahead of the curve and looking good doing it, see Medtronic, a Minneapolis-based medical device colossus with a facility in Danvers. In February, the devices giant proudly announced its plan to start voluntarily disclosing payments to U.S. physicians, complete with a public, third-party audit.

But Medtronics’ move wasn’t made without its critics, who complained that the company’s registry isn’t transparent enough. That’s because it doesn’t provide enough detail about the role of its vendors in deciding how and where Medtronic spends its cash, they say.

Maheras believes the leveling of the playing field for smaller companies with equally-sized marketing budgets is another opportunity. With less focus on salesmanship, her theory goes, the greater the ability to focus on product quality.

“That perspective was not raised to us in our outreach and advocacy,” says Tim Sweeney, director of public policy at the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, which helped lobby against state-level regulations. “Uniformly, what we heard from these companies was concern that this was not drafted correctly.”

Being small is, in fact, a distinct disadvantage when it comes to the new rules, according to MassMEDIC’s Sommer, since the first disclosure report is due July 1, 2010. Larger companies have the resources to rapidly bring compliance policies and systems online.

“It is a challenge and probably will be more of a problem for small- and medium-sized companies, which make up the bulk of the medical device industry,” he says.

The biggest unanswered question, one raised but not addressed by the regulations, is their long-term impact on the medical device industry when it takes a front-row seat next to pharma. The new Massachusetts rules leave little distinction between the industries. And with higher scrutiny and low public opinion bedeviling pharma, there seems to be little upside in sharing the spotlight.

{IMAGELEFT:http://www.massdevice.com/sites/default/wp-content/uploads/headshots/Cummings_Deirdre_100x100.jpg}”I can understand their concern, not wanting to be lumped together with the drug industry, but from a public health and consumer perspective there’s no reason to wait for the medical device industry to get as bad as the drug companies are,” says Deirdre Cummings, legislative director for MASSPIRG, which joined Healthcare for All in lobbying for the law.

“The Department of Public Health did say there is some uniqueness between these two industries, but overall the idea is still the same,” Cummings adds. “If there’s going to be a lot of spending in this particular private sector, we ought to get a handle on it fairly quickly.”

Maheras agrees that “pharma has a big target on themselves, fairly or unfairly, and medical device companies tend to be quieter,” but those days are likely over. More and more people are using more and more medical devices, thanks to the graying of the Baby Boom generation.

Sommer considers the grouping with pharma unfair and inaccurate, noting that “we have different manufacturing processes, different workers, different investors, the timelines are different, we don’t enjoy the same patent protections,” sounding distinctly like someone who’s already had this argument – and grown tired of losing it.

“We’re a different industry,” he says, “and I’ll leave it at that.”

Filed Under: Business/Financial News Tagged With: Gift Bans

In case you missed it

  • The road to a robot: Medtronic’s development process for Hugo RAS system
  • How Dexcom’s portfolio goes beyond highly-anticipated next-gen G7
  • Zimmer Biomet appoints new chief accounting officer
  • Cook Medical makes next-gen in vitro fertilization incubator available in U.S., Canada
  • Boston Scientific co-founder Peter Nicholas is dead at 80
  • How Boston Scientific uses clinical feedback to advance innovation
  • How Stryker includes users for product design in the digital age
  • DermaSensor wins MedTech Innovator Mid-Stage Companies Pitch Event
  • FDA approves Medtronic’s Onyx Frontier drug-eluting coronary stent
  • Medtronic completes Intersect ENT acquisition
  • Steris rises on Street-beating Q4, sets fiscal 2023 guidance
  • Medtronic must sell Intersect ENT subsidiary to satisfy FTC concerns
  • Abbott partners with Women as One to help more underrepresented clinicians lead trials
  • Lucira Health asks FDA for EUA on molecular at-home COVID/flu test
  • Device commercialization platform AcuityMD raises $31M Series A to fund R&D engineer hiring
  • Abbott announces availability of Xience Skypoint drug-eluting stent in extended sizes
  • GE Healthcare to invest $50M in Pulsenmore to enter homecare segment

RSS From Medical Design & Outsourcing

  • Texas power grid struggles in heat one year after record cold stopped semiconductor plants
    A heat wave in Texas took at least six power plants offline Friday with high temperatures forecasted to blaze throughout this week. A record cold snap in February 2021 took NXP Semiconductors and Samsung chip fabrication facilities offline for weeks, contributing to a global semicondcutor shortage that is still throttling medical device production. There’s no… […]
  • How Stryker includes users for product design in the digital age
    Medical device developers and manufacturers like Stryker (NYSE:SYK) are changing how they approach design as digital technology becomes more crucial. Four Stryker executives shared how the Kalamazoo, Michigan–based orthopedic device giant is thinking differently about medical product development and how health care providers and patients will ultimately use them. The DeviceTalks Boston panel of Stryker… […]
  • DermaSensor wins MedTech Innovator Mid-Stage Companies Pitch Event
    DermaSensor Inc. — the creator of a handheld, point-and-click device to quickly assess skin lesions for cancer risk — is the winner of the MedTech Innovator Mid-Stage Companies Pitch Event.  The Miami-based mid-stage company beat out 1,000 applicants, more than 20 of which competed on-site May 10–11, 2022 at DeviceTalks Boston. DermaSensor walked away with… […]
  • Steris rises on Street-beating Q4, sets fiscal 2023 guidance
    Steris (NYSE:STE) shares ticked up today on fourth-quarter financial results that came in just ahead of the consensus forecast. The infection prevention technology company — headquartered in Dublin, Ireland, and run operationally out of Mentor, Ohio — posted profits of $52.3 million, or 52¢ per share, on sales of $1.2 billion for the three months… […]
  • Lucira Health asks FDA for EUA on molecular at-home COVID/flu test
    Lucira Health (Nasdaq: LHDX) today said it has asked the FDA for an emergency use authorization (EUA) for its combination COVID-19 and flu test. Emeryville, California–based Lucira said the at-home test would be available with a prescription to test for SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A and Influenza B. The Nucleic Acid Amplification Test (NAAT) platform has a… […]
  • Device commercialization platform AcuityMD raises $31M Series A to fund R&D engineer hiring
    AcuityMD said today it has raised $31 million in Series A funding for its medical device commercialization platform. “With our new funding, we plan to double down on R&D by growing our engineering team from 15 to over 40 over the next year,” AcuityMD co-founder and CEO Michael Monovoukas said in a blog post. “We’ll… […]
  • Rockley Photonics announces $81.5M private placement
    Rockley Photonics (NYSE:RKLY) announced today that it entered into agreements for an $81.5 million private placement. Participating investors agreed to purchase $81.5 million in convertible senior secured notes (due 2026) and warrants to purchase 26.5 million Rockley ordinary shares at an exercise price of $5 per share, subject to certain anti-dilution adjustments. Warrants purchased in… […]
  • Stryker leaders talk medtech trends at DeviceTalks Boston: ‘If you’re slow, you’re going to lose’
    The first day of DeviceTalks Boston closed with a panel of Stryker (NYSE:SYK) executives discussing new tools, technologies and strategies in medtech. Digital VP Tracy Robertson, Digital, Robotics, and Enabling Technologies President Robert Cohen and Surgical Technologies VP of Digital Innovation Siddarth Satish offered their thoughts on industry trends in healthcare and at the Kalamazoo,… […]
  • Medtronic’s VC leader discusses risk, returns, strategy and an ‘ugly truth’
    A panel of medtech investors convened today for DeviceTalks Boston included David Neustaedter, VP of venture capital at Medtronic (NYSE: MDT). He’s spent 14 years in the role, including as director of venture capital at Covidien before Medtronic acquired the company. (Read more in his DeviceTalks speaker bio.) Medtronic has more than $500 million in… […]
  • Here’s where Harvard’s engineering dean sees medtech research going
    Surgical robotics, artificial intelligence, and combatting climate change are but some of the priorities that have Harvard’s engineering school dean excited. Speaking today at DeviceTalks Boston, Frank J. Doyle III described the Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences as a “well-kept secret” historically. But Harvard engineering is staking out a strong position when it… […]
  • gBETA Medtech accelerator picks its next startups
    The gBETA Medtech virtual accelerator today named the five startups that will participate in the spring program leading up to the June 21 showcase day. The five startups for the spring 2022 cohort are: Mother of Fact: This mobile app for moms with babies offers nutrition tracking, preventative monitoring and daily coaching from licensed dietitians… […]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Primary Sidebar

DeviceTalks Weekly

May 13, 2022
Our Pre-Post-DeviceTalks Boston episode, also MedtronicTalks replay with Gastro CMO Austin Chiang
See More >

MEDTECH 100 INDEX

Medtech 100 logo
Market Summary > Current Price
The MedTech 100 is a financial index calculated using the BIG100 companies covered in Medical Design and Outsourcing.
Need Medtech news in a minute?
We Deliver!

MassDevice Enewsletters get you caught up on all the mission critical news you need in med tech. Sign up today.

MDO ad

Footer

MASSDEVICE MEDICAL NETWORK

DeviceTalks
Drug Delivery Business News
Medical Design & Outsourcing
Medical Tubing + Extrusion
Drug Discovery & Development
Pharmaceutical Processing World
MedTech 100 Index
R&D World

Device Talks Webinars, Podcasts, & Discussions

Attend our Monthly Webinars
Listen to our Weekly Podcasts
Join our Device Talks Tuesdays Discussion

MASSDEVICE

Subscribe to MassDevice E-Newsletter
Advertise with us
About
Contact us
Add us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Connect with us on LinkedIn Follow us on YouTube

Copyright © 2022 · WTWH Media LLC and its licensors. All rights reserved.
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of WTWH Media.

Advertise | Privacy Policy | RSS