10/12/2024    Allen M. Jacobs, DPM

Are Some CME Programs Just Infomercials?

I received a recent notice from a CPME-approved
CME provider with reference to an upcoming free
CME event awarding 1 CECH. Three speakers are
scheduled to discuss a product/technique. The
program is sponsored by a corporation. The
sponsoring of such programs by corporations and
the awarding of free CME (CECH) has become common-
place in our profession. The common thread running
through all of these programs is a discussion
which includes obvious bias as the speakers are
generally consultants or otherwise financial
beneficiaries of the product or corporation, the
CME providers receives money to present the
discussion, and ultimately the discussion result
in a positive view of the product or technique
presented. These programs are simply infomercials.

In addition to the ease with which these programs
may be presented virtually, our profession and
CPME/APMA have allowed this misuse of the so
called "unrestricted educational grant" process to
increasing dominate post graduate education. My
question: where is the CPME ? Why are "free CECH"
hours or any CECH awarded for watching and
enduring obvious infomercials ? If you wish to
discuss a technique or product which you believe
is of benefit to patient care, then do so.
However, biased discussions and presentations
driven by corporate interest are not acceptable
for CECH. The speakers benefit, the CME provider
benefits, you are "educated" as to the technique
or product, but does patient care benefit ?

Do the CME providers review these discussions in
detail prior to allowing their presentation for
CECH ? Does the CPME review this process ? Are
presentations at local state, regional, national
meetings actually reviewed and evaluated according
to CPME guidelines. If you believe that, I have a
bridge in Brooklyn for you to consider purchasing.
Residents are wined and dined by corporations.
When asked to speak at some meetings, the first
qualifying inquiry is " who will sponsor (pay for)
you ?

Some podiatric educational programs are a literal
parade of paid for biased speakers for drugs,
surgical techniques, wound care products. The CPME
does nothing but review paperwork, which of course
contains one affirmative attestation after the
other. Recently, I listened to a speaker at a CME
meeting ( a consultant paid over $250,000 in one
year by a company making an oral antibiotic ) that
the utilization of vancomycin for the treatment of
MRSA was " a thing of the past that belongs in the
graveyard". He stated that the particular oral
antibiotic he was advocating was now a total
substitute for MRSA management. The ID people with
home I work daily were somewhat shocked at this
suggestion, and at first actually though I was
joking.

The IWGDF guidelines on the management of diabetic
foot ulceration, based on literature and science
and not corporate payments, suggest that many in
fact most of the wound care products we have been
advised to utilize have in fact little if any true
scientific basis for use. Misinformation results
in the irrational use of products and techniques,
deprives patients of actual needed care, and
ultimately patient harm. It is time to stop the
misuse of CME for personal financial gain.

Allen M. Jacobs, DPM, St. Louis, MO

There are no more messages in this thread.