Eyeworld

EW ASCRS PREVIEW 35 This year's Charles D. Kelman Innovator lecturer, Richard L. Lindstrom, M.D., will discuss the conflict of interest controversy and increasing regulatory burdens O ne of the highlights of the ASCRS Annual Meeting is the Innovator's Session, highlighted by a named lecture. This year's presen- ter of the Charles D. Kelman Inno- vator's Lecture is Richard L. Lindstrom, M.D., adjunct professor emeritus, department of ophthal- mology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, and founder, Min- nesota Eye Consultants, Minneapo- lis, who will "talk about two major issues—one is the conflict of interest controversy as it relates to medical education. Then I'm going to talk about that and the increasing regula- tory burdens as they relate to tech- nology and innovation and the pressures this puts on the innova- tion cycle," he told EyeWorld. For example, of the $2.4 billion spent yearly on continuing medical education (CME), "about 60% of that is provided from pharmaceuti- cal and device manufacturers," Dr. Lindstrom said. "CME fulfills an im- portant and essential public pur- pose, and it is critical to ensure we are delivering the highest quality care." Yet political pressure is creat- ing a scenario whereby eliminating CME industry support is being rec- ommended by many. "That would mean more than half the funding would disappear, and it is unrealistic that physicians will pick up those additional costs," Dr. Lindstrom said. The dilemma, he believes, origi- nates with the "conflict of interest" term that's currently being bandied about by politicians. Every ophthal- mologist faces conflicts of interest that are simply unavoidable, he said. "If a patient rushes in at the end of the day with a ruptured globe, but you have anniversary dinner reser- vations, do you leave? Do you refer the patient to someone in your of- fice? That's a conflict of interest, too," he said. As long as decisions made do not breach the physician's obligation or duty to patients, they can be managed or mitigated easily, primarily through transparent dis- closures, he said. "The approach of trying to make conflicts of interest illegal is not realistic," he said. "I am support- ive of some of the new recommen- dations for transparency and disclosure. There's a negative impact to science if we take every innovator and consultant off the podium." He cited Harvard University's conflict of interest policy, which es- sentially states its support for work- ing with industry and encourages its faculty to collaborate with industry, found biotech companies, and even invest in those companies, Dr. Lind- strom said. by Michelle Dalton EyeWorld Contributing Editor An ophthalmologist's role in education and innovation Richard L. Lindstrom, M.D. continued on page 37

• Cover