Pfizer’s Medical Education Group (MEG) announced that it is adopting a new model of medical education grant-making that it “believe enhances the alignment of their business interests and reasons for supporting continuing education for healthcare professionals with solutions to public health issues, the educational needs of healthcare professionals and quality improvement initiatives designed to close professional practice gaps.
As noted by an article in Medical Marketing & Media, the new process represents the biggest change to Pfizer grant-making since its move toward regional grant management in 2007, in which a group of directors was hired to fund education by geographic area.
Pfizer will continue to support knowledge-based CE at live meetings in more than 20 clinical areas, as well as large multifaceted projects designed to improve healthcare.
In 2008, the firm announced that it would no longer support accredited CME programs directly through commercial providers. While Pfizer plans to develop RFPs that may broaden the number and types of organizations that may request support, according to another member of the grants department, “The expectation continues that those organizations [responding to an RFP] be not-for-profit.”
Why Change Now?
Pfizer explained that the current MEG process is based on an “education-centric system” of continuing education that is in the midst of change, and “which is often disconnected from the real challenges facing healthcare today.” Accrediting and licensing bodies are moving away from a time-based credit system to a performance improvement-based system for board certification and licensure of healthcare professionals.
The model of the future is that of practice change and competency, and traditional CE/CME activities will not likely be sufficient for this level of improvement to occur or to be sustained.
As a result, Pfizer’s Medical Education Group fundamentally believes that “adopting a new model is in the best interest of patients, healthcare professionals, health systems and Pfizer.” Pfizer noted in its presentation that the new model will “provide for greater impact, at higher frequencies by focusing on key clinical areas of interest to Pfizer, with significant overlap of global health care issues.” The new model makes a strategic distinction between:
- Those clinical areas where knowledge exchange around emerging science and discoveries is necessary and foundational, and
- Those where the translation of knowledge into practice is paramount to closing practice gaps and improving patient care, is the foundation of this model.
The company also noted that “the current financial constraints and a budget that has steadily decreased each speak to the need for a new efficient, more effective model that allows Pfizer to make a stronger, more positive impact on the lives of patients and the healthcare system today, with less resources.”
In a presentation announcing the new changes, Pfizer noted that the “current one-size-fits-all model is not enough to make a measurable difference in the healthcare community at large,” and instead, there needs to be a greater push for “high quality medical education with a purpose.” The presentation also noted that a patient care-centric model of CME is necessary because it “recognizes that education is but one of many solutions to closing practice gaps and improving patient outcomes.”
Pfizer noted that “90% of the MEG budget is targeted to closing practice gaps and improving healthcare” while “eliminating high-dollar grant funding for low impact areas.”
New Pfizer MEG Model – Two Tracks
Track 1 – Continuing Education and Quality Improvement: Process includes the publishing of evidence-based, data driven Request for Proposals (RFPs) in key clinical areas where gaps have been identified through external entities (government agencies like NIH and CDC, academia, Medicare/Medicaid data), registries and other assessment methodologies and processes (needs assessments, gap analyses, quality indicators, etc.). Clinical areas include
- Vaccines
- Oncology
- Smoking Cessation
- Pain & Inflammation
- Infectious Disease
- Women’s Health
Each customized RFP will focus on areas (clinical, geographical, methodological) where Pfizer support could potentially have the greatest impact on improved patient care and outcomes.
Based on models utilized by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation (RWJ), the new Pfizer MEG model will allow for a collaborative dialog between Pfizer’s Medical Education Group and healthcare organizations regarding evidence-based need, practice gaps and innovative strategies and methodologies to help close those gaps.
Borrowing from Pfizer’s current model, Pfizer’s MEG will continue to acknowledge and embrace the value and importance of independence with respect to the content of any initiative it supports. Additionally, the implementation of External Review Panels will provide additional assurances that all proposals supported are based on sound, externally-validated evidence, and include appropriate methodologies and assessments designed to align with the clinical problems needing to be solved.
Track 2 – Emerging Science/Knowledge Exchange: Pfizer MEG will establish a mechanism whereby providers of education can request funding to support LIVE activities at annual meetings, national conferences and congresses, recognizing the important, but limited role this type of medical education plays in disseminating new information.
Clinical areas of interest and goals (based on needs data) will be published similar to the current MEG model. Eligible providers will submit a funding request through the online MEG portal. Grant thresholds will be established based on conference size/scope, the number of grant requests received by a single organization, and overall grant volume will be limited in order to manage scope with reduced resources.
Ongoing Initiatives: There will be initiatives that fall out of scope for Track 1 or Track 2, including projects that MEG has supported prior to January 1, 2012 that require ongoing oversight through completion of the project.
Additionally, Pfizer supports medical education through its various alliance activities where the review process and requirements are negotiated between the two companies.
Lastly, as REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies) requirements evolve and include CME as a component, MEG will provide oversight, review and decision-making for all grants associated with REMS.
How does this new model differ from the current MEG model?
MEG will continue to focus its efforts on transparency, responsibility and the interests of the public through support of medical education and quality improvement initiatives. Pfizer explained that the “primary difference is a shift from an unsolicited process (with few CGAs – Calls for Grants), to an RFP-driven process that enables Pfizer MEG to be more focused on clinical areas of interest with the greatest need for improvement.”
The new model allows Pfizer’s MEG experts to engage in a collaborative dialog with organizations wishing to submit a proposal for consideration. Serving as liaisons between External Review Panels and the external community. The External Review Panels are important components of the new model, since their addition will allow for the collaborative dialog described above as well as improved transparency.
Pfizer noted that “ultimately, the merits and integrity of any proposal, whether or not a Pfizer MEG member was involved in early discussions, will be based on the strength of the proposal and the power of the data it is based upon. All proposals will be reviewed by a Pfizer attorney, and the final decision to approve or deny will be made by the External Review Panel.”
Members of the External Review Panels will consist of professionals from the medical community with advanced degrees and expertise in a particular clinical area, or specific needs of a geographic region/learner groups, or expertise in CME, CE, Continuing Professional Development (CPD) or Quality Improvement.
All members will have published previous works and/or proven accomplishments. Pfizer will establish a vetting process that resolves all conflicts of interest prior to engaging committee members. All appropriate legal and regulatory processes will be implemented to ensure members are acting in the best interest of patients when reviewing and approving proposals; in compliance with all internal and external policies.
Conclusion
Ultimately Pfizer’s MEG noted that it hopes from this new model to be viewed as a “trusted partner in helping to solve the problems of healthcare through medical education and quality improvement.” Pfizer also outlined in its presentation that all aspects of the new process will be transparent and made public, and that the company will “maintain compliance with OIG CIA requirements while exceeding expectations for open and transparent decision-making.
Great summary of the webcast. Thanks for this thorough summary.
Why Not Sell Tobacco Smoke Is A Bad Idea
Investing in cigarette smoke is definitely the best thing you can do if you are a smoker and are looking for solutions that can help you overcome your addiction in a very short time and live your best life. If you want to know about the benefits offere…