A 10-year comparative analysis of medical and surgical specialty lobbying by physician professional organizations.

IF 2.7
Health affairs scholar Pub Date : 2025-07-09 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1093/haschl/qxaf140
Max Bouvette, Stephanie Beveridge, Kirtana Kumar, Mehak Ali, Justin Dvorak, Nirmal Choradia, Ryan Nipp
{"title":"A 10-year comparative analysis of medical and surgical specialty lobbying by physician professional organizations.","authors":"Max Bouvette, Stephanie Beveridge, Kirtana Kumar, Mehak Ali, Justin Dvorak, Nirmal Choradia, Ryan Nipp","doi":"10.1093/haschl/qxaf140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Physician professional organizations (PPOs) engage in lobbying to advocate for their interests and influence health policy. However, trends in lobbying across specialties are not well characterized. Disproportionate spending across PPOs may affect the ability to shape healthcare legislation and ensure that all physician voices are represented.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed publicly available lobbying data from OpenSecrets.org covering 2014-2023, adjusted to 2023 USD. A total of 109 PPOs were included. Physician professional organizations were categorized as medical (<i>n</i> = 68), surgical (<i>n</i> = 29), or overlapping (<i>n</i> = 12), based on whether they primarily represented medical specialties, surgical specialties, or both. Physician workforce data from the AAMC were used to calculate spending per-physician. Temporal trends were assessed using a Mann-Kendall test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median annual PPO lobbying spending was $71 million, with a significant downward trend (<i>P</i> < .01, tau = -.64). Expenditures included $32 million (45%) by medical PPOs, $12 million (16%) by surgical PPOs, and $27 million (39%) by overlapping PPOs. The median annual lobbying spending per-physician was $78.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest that PPOs have not sustained lobbying investments over time, particularly when accounting for the effects of inflation.</p>","PeriodicalId":94025,"journal":{"name":"Health affairs scholar","volume":"3 7","pages":"qxaf140"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12287694/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health affairs scholar","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxaf140","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Physician professional organizations (PPOs) engage in lobbying to advocate for their interests and influence health policy. However, trends in lobbying across specialties are not well characterized. Disproportionate spending across PPOs may affect the ability to shape healthcare legislation and ensure that all physician voices are represented.

Methods: We analyzed publicly available lobbying data from OpenSecrets.org covering 2014-2023, adjusted to 2023 USD. A total of 109 PPOs were included. Physician professional organizations were categorized as medical (n = 68), surgical (n = 29), or overlapping (n = 12), based on whether they primarily represented medical specialties, surgical specialties, or both. Physician workforce data from the AAMC were used to calculate spending per-physician. Temporal trends were assessed using a Mann-Kendall test.

Results: Median annual PPO lobbying spending was $71 million, with a significant downward trend (P < .01, tau = -.64). Expenditures included $32 million (45%) by medical PPOs, $12 million (16%) by surgical PPOs, and $27 million (39%) by overlapping PPOs. The median annual lobbying spending per-physician was $78.

Conclusion: These findings suggest that PPOs have not sustained lobbying investments over time, particularly when accounting for the effects of inflation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

医师专业组织对内科和外科专业游说的10年比较分析。
医师专业组织(PPOs)从事游说,倡导自己的利益和影响卫生政策。然而,跨专业游说的趋势并没有很好地表征。私人诊所之间不成比例的支出可能会影响制定医疗保健立法的能力,并确保所有医生的声音都得到代表。方法:我们分析了OpenSecrets.org上公开的2014-2023年的游说数据,调整为2023美元。共纳入109个ppo。医师专业组织被分类为医学(n = 68)、外科(n = 29)或重叠(n = 12),基于它们主要代表医学专业、外科专业,还是两者兼而有之。来自AAMC的医生劳动力数据被用来计算每位医生的支出。使用Mann-Kendall检验评估时间趋势。结果:年度PPO游说支出中位数为7100万美元,呈显著下降趋势(P < 0.01, tau = - 0.64)。支出包括3200万美元(45%)来自医疗私人诊所,1200万美元(16%)来自外科私人诊所,2700万美元(39%)来自重叠私人诊所。每位医生每年的游说支出中位数为78美元。结论:这些发现表明,私人股本公司并没有长期维持游说投资,特别是在考虑到通货膨胀的影响时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信