Does industry funding mean more publications for subspecialty academic plastic surgeons?

BACKGROUND: Conflict of interest among physicians in the context of private industry funding led to the introduction of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act in 2010. This study examined whether private industry funding correlated with scholarly productivity in the respective subspecialties of plastic surgery and the wider academic plastic surgery community. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Full-time plastic surgeons and their academic attributes were identified via institutional websites. Fellowship-trained individuals were segregated into subspecialties of microsurgery, craniofacial surgery, hand surgery, esthetic surgery, and burn surgery. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payment database was used to extract industry funding information. Each individual's bibliometric data were then collected through Scopus to determine the correlation between selected surgeon characteristics, academic productivity, and industry funding. RESULTS: Nine hundred and thirty-five academic plastic surgeons were identified, with 532 having defined subspecialty training. Academic bibliometrics among subspecialty surgeons were comparable among the five groups with esthetic and craniofacial surgeons displaying a preponderance of attaining more industry funding (P = 0.043) and career publications respectively, with the latter not attaining statistical significance (P = 0.12). Overall, research-specific funding (P = 0.014) and higher funding amounts (P < 0.0001) correlated with higher Hirsch indices in tandem with higher academic rank. A funding level of $2000 appeared to be the approximate cutoff above which scholastic productivity became apparent. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated in detail the association between industry funding and academic bibliometrics in academic plastic surgery of every subspecialty. Even at modest amounts, industry support, especially when research designated, positively influenced research and therefore, academic output.

Trends in immediate breast reconstruction and early complication rates among older women: A big data analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although approximately 57% of breast cancer (BC) diagnoses are in older patients (>60 years), only 4.1-14% receives breast reconstruction (BR). This has been attributed to physician concerns about operative complications. This paper aims to: 1) analyze the 30-day complication rates in the older patient population undergoing immediate breast reconstruction (IBR); and 2) analyze links between complication type and category of reconstruction. METHODS: Using the ACS-NSQIP database (2005-2014), all women older than 60 years of age diagnosed with BC and DCIS were identified. IBR and complication rates were plotted for all ages. Patients were divided into those with and those without complications. Patient demographics and co-morbidities were compared. Complications within each type of reconstruction were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 4450 BC and 1104 DCIS patients, 22.3% (BC) and 20.9% (DCIS) had complications. IBR decreased significantly with increased age (P < 0.00 in both cohorts), while complication rates remained stable across all ages (P = 0.32 in BC, P = 0.69 in DCIS patients). Patients were well matched in terms of demographics. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of breast reconstruction decrease with increasing age. Despite increasing age, associated complication rates in IBR patients remained stable.