Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorT. Forcht Dagi and Kevin L. Ohashi.en_US
dc.contributor.authorWolf, Daniel W. (Daniel William)en_US
dc.contributor.otherHarvard University--MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-01T16:30:30Z
dc.date.available2010-09-01T16:30:30Z
dc.date.copyright2010en_US
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/58093
dc.descriptionThesis (S.M.)--Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, 2010.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 99-102).en_US
dc.description.abstractThe Massachusetts Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Manufacturer Code of Conduct (PCOC) or 105 CMR 970.000 was enacted by the Massachusetts state legislature and adopted by the Department of Public Health (DPH) in July 2009 under Chapter 305 of the Acts of 2008, An Act To Promote Cost Containment, Transparency and Efficiency in the Delivery of Quality Health Care. The state law requires pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to comply with a marketing code of conduct, obey specific compliance activities, and disclose payments to Massachusetts-licensed healthcare providers with a value of $50 or more in connection with sales and marketing activities. This thesis qualitatively assessed the impact of 105 CMR 970.000 on physician-industry collaboration related to technology development and physician education in the Massachusetts medical device industry, as depicted by academic physicians and representatives of medical device companies during the first quarter of calendar year 2010. A pilot study comprising interviews and surveys of stakeholders in the Massachusetts medical device industry was conducted to summarize the initial impressions of the impact of 105 CMR 970.000 on medical device physician-industry collaboration, with the intention of creating a roadmap for future analysis. Informal interviews (36) included individuals at medical device manufacturers, distributors, academic medical centers, venture capital firms, law firms, consulting firms, MassMedic, and the DPH. Formal surveys (40) included academic physicians and medical device company representatives selling to Massachusetts licensed physicians. The hypothesis was confirmed that 105 CMR 970.000 has impaired medical device physician-industry collaboration related to technology development and physician education in Massachusetts. Our results may have state and federal regulatory implications for the medical device industry and can serve as a guide for future analysis.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Daniel W. Wolf.en_US
dc.format.extent102 p.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectHarvard University--MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology.en_US
dc.titleImpact of the Massachusetts Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Manufacturer Code of Conduct on medical device physician-industry collaborationen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeS.M.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentHarvard University--MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology.en_US
dc.identifier.oclc656272936en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record