Medical Meetings and the Trump Administration

As President-elect Donald J. Trump prepares to take office, event organizers must consider the effects of his policies and appointments on the medical meetings industry.

I’ve been getting many inquiries about the future of medical meetings under the new Trump administration. While none of us has a crystal ball, it’s wise to explore the ways in which health-care conferences and conventions may — or may not — be affected. I’ve mapped out potential changes with the new administration that may have a direct or trickle-down effect on medical events.

1. Health-care Policy and Funding

• Regulatory Changes — Trump’s previous focus on deregulation could potentially simplify processes for clinical trials or medical research, but this may also raise concerns about oversight and safety.
• Pharmaceutical Pricing — Trump has emphasized lowering drug prices, which could shift priorities for pharma companies. This may affect the budgets available for medical meetings and congresses.
• Insurance Coverage — If changes to health-care legislation were enacted, they could influence patient care models and research funding, indirectly impacting topics and attendance at meetings.

2. Travel and Immigration Policies

• Visa Restrictions — Policies on visas and immigration could affect international participation at U.S.-based medical congresses, impacting global collaboration in science and medicine.
• Trade Relations — Tariffs or tensions with specific countries could affect partnerships with international organizations or sponsors of medical events.

3. Corporate and Pharma Investments

• If economic policies under Trump are perceived as beneficial to big corporations, pharmaceutical companies may see increased profits, which could translate to more robust investment in medical education, sponsorships, and events.
• Conversely, if budgets are constrained by new pricing regulations, it could lead to reduced spending on meetings and conferences.

4. Public Perception and Advocacy

• Trump’s stance on COVID-19 and other health issues has been polarizing. This could influence attendance at — or the thematic focus of — medical events, particularly those that make topics like pandemic preparedness or public health strategies central to their programs.

5. Industry Innovation

• If policies incentivize domestic innovation, there could be a rise in U.S.-based medical research and meetings showcasing advancements.

6. Global Competition

• If international relations grow tense, some foreign entities may choose non-U.S. destinations for medical congresses, specifically held in Europe or Asia, over those in the U.S.

As a medical event organizer, you may want to prepare for these potential shifts by focusing on flexible planning strategies, monitoring regulatory updates, and staying aligned with corporate priorities. Engaging with key stakeholders to assess their perspectives on the political climate will also help in forecasting the potential impacts.

If Trump were to revisit health-care policies during another term, his administration may aim to modify, scale back, or alter programs like Open Payments, a transparency initiative under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Open Payments, managed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), requires pharmaceutical and medical device companies to report financial relationships with physicians and teaching hospitals.

Donald J. Trump

Potential Impacts of a Trump Presidency on Open Payments

1. Deregulation Focus

• Trump’s prior focus on reducing regulatory burdens for businesses could lead to attempts to weaken reporting requirements for Open Payments. This could include raising the dollar threshold for reporting or narrowing the types of transactions that must be disclosed.
• Pharmaceutical and device companies may advocate for fewer restrictions to reduce compliance costs, which could resonate with Trump’s pro-business agenda.

2. Reduced Enforcement or Oversight

• If funding for CMS or other oversight bodies is reduced, enforcement of Open Payments requirements could become less rigorous, leading to fewer audits or investigations into noncompliance.

3. Transparency Balancing Act

• While Trump often supported deregulatory policies, he also spoke about drug price transparency and reducing health-care costs. Maintaining or even expanding Open Payments may align with a populist message of holding large companies accountable, particularly if it’s framed as benefiting patients.

4. Indirect Impacts From ACA Revisions

• Any effort to repeal or replace parts of the ACA could put programs like Open Payments at risk of elimination or modification, as they are tied to the ACA infrastructure.

5. Impact on Industry Relationships

• If changes were made to reporting requirements, it could alter the visibility of financial relationships between health-care providers and industry. This may affect public trust and perceptions about the influence of industry funding in medicine.

What This Means for Medical Meetings

• Changes to Open Payments could influence how pharmaceutical and device companies approach sponsorship and education at medical meetings.
• If reporting thresholds are raised or requirements are reduced, companies may feel less constrained in supporting events or covering expenses like speaker fees, travel, and meals.
• Conversely, stricter rules could lead to more conservative spending, impacting funding for educational initiatives and collaborations.

The future of Open Payments under Trump would depend on the administration’s prioritization of health-care reform versus deregulation. It’s a dynamic area to watch closely as shifts could significantly affect compliance, industry behaviors, and funding within the medical meeting sector.

President Trump’s potential impact on the Open Payments program under ACA would depend on his broader health-care agenda and regulatory priorities. Here’s what to consider:

1. Background on Open Payments

The Open Payments program, which requires pharmaceutical companies and medical device manufacturers to disclose financial relationships with health-care providers, is intended to prevent conflicts of interest in medical research, education, and practice.

2. Trump’s Health-care Focus

• Deregulation Priority — Trump’s previous emphasis on reducing regulatory burdens could mean efforts to streamline or modify Open Payments reporting requirements. For example, reporting thresholds or categories could be adjusted to ease compliance for companies.
• Transparency Commitments — While Trump has advocated for price transparency in health care, his administration showed less focus on regulating industry-physician relationships. This could mean a shift away from expanding the scope of Open Payments.

3. Potential Changes

• Scale-Back of ACA Provisions — If Trump pushes for changes to ACA-related programs, Open Payments could face reduced enforcement or budget cuts. However, the program has bipartisan support for its role in ensuring accountability, making a complete rollback unlikely.
• Impact on Reporting Requirements — There could be efforts to adjust reporting criteria to favor industry stakeholders, potentially reducing the granularity of publicly available data.

4. Industry and Meeting Implications

• Pharma and Device Manufacturers — If reporting becomes less stringent, companies may allocate more resources to physician engagements, including medical education and meeting sponsorships.
• Public Perception — A less transparent system could face criticism, potentially affecting trust in the health-care system and increasing scrutiny at medical meetings.

Overall, any direct changes to Open Payments would reflect Trump’s broader regulatory goals and health-care priorities, balancing industry support with public demands for transparency. It’s worth monitoring legislative and regulatory developments closely for any concrete proposals.

Robert F Kennedy, Jr

The Potential Impact of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s New Role on the Medical Meetings Industry

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s potential influence on the medical meetings industry would hinge on his policies, public health priorities, and the reception of his views on vaccines and health care. Here are some key areas where his impact could be felt:

1. Vaccine Policies and Public Health

• Controversial Vaccine Stance — Kennedy has been a prominent critic of certain vaccine policies, advocating for transparency and vaccine safety. This could:
  • Influence meeting topics related to immunology, vaccine development, and public health.
  • Shift the focus of discussions at conferences to include debates on vaccine mandates, safety protocols, and alternative approaches to public health.
• Polarization of Attendees — Kennedy’s stance could attract supporters and skeptics alike, leading to more dynamic — and possibly contentious — dialogue at medical meetings.

2. Regulatory and Policy Changes

• Increased Scrutiny on Pharma — If Kennedy pursues policies emphasizing corporate accountability, pharmaceutical companies may face stricter regulations. This could affect their budgets for sponsoring medical education and events.
• Research Funding Realignment — Changes in funding priorities — for instance, emphasizing environmental health or alternative medical approaches — could impact the types of research showcased at meetings.

3. Public Perception and Attendance

• Boosted Engagement — Kennedy’s controversial views may increase interest in meetings covering contentious topics like vaccine policies, environmental health impacts on disease, or emerging health threats.
• Potential Divisions: Public debates surrounding his policies could create challenges for organizers in maintaining neutrality and inclusivity at events.

4. Travel and Event Logistics

• Global Collaboration — If Kennedy’s policies affect international health partnerships, it could potentially influence global attendance or the structure of internationally focused meetings.
• Corporate Sponsorship Shifts — Companies may recalibrate their involvement based on the political climate and Kennedy’s relationship with the pharmaceutical industry.

5. Environmental Focus

Kennedy is a strong environmental advocate. This could increase interest in such topics as:

• The intersection of climate change and public health.
• Sustainable practices in organizing medical meetings, such as reducing the carbon footprint of events.

6. Industry Preparedness

• Heightened Need for Fact-Based Discussions — Medical meetings may need to prepare for increased scrutiny and ensure content aligns with evidence-based medicine to counter any misinformation.
• Stakeholder Engagement — Kennedy’s potential influence could prompt organizations to engage more actively with policymakers and advocacy groups to shape the narrative around critical issues.

For planners like you, the focus should be on fostering balanced, evidence-driven conversations, anticipating audience sensitivities, and staying aligned with emerging trends in public health under Kennedy’s influence.

Dr. Mehmet Oz

The Potential Impact of Dr. Oz’s Appointment as Director of Health and Human Services on the Medical Meetings Industry

If Dr. Mehmet Oz were appointed as the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), his impact on medical meetings could be shaped by his unique background as a physician, media personality, and advocate for alternative health practices. Here’s an analysis of potential effects:

Influence on Health-care Policy

• Emphasis on Preventative and Holistic Health — Oz’s public health focus often includes lifestyle medicine, nutrition, and alternative therapies. This could:
  • Shift meeting agendas toward wellness, preventive medicine, and complementary therapies.
  • Increase funding or emphasis on related research and panels at medical conferences.
• Public-Private Partnerships — His media-friendly approach could encourage initiatives to merge public health campaigns with corporate involvement, potentially increasing sponsorships for meetings addressing broader public health topics.

2. Regulatory Changes

• Inclusion of Alternative Medicine — Oz’s support for integrative medicine may lead to HHS programs that endorse or fund alternative treatments. Medical meetings could see expanded tracks on these topics, potentially attracting new audiences and sparking debate.
• Streamlining Approvals — His public commentary on health-care reform suggests a potential push for faster approval of treatments and technologies. This could make innovation a prominent theme in medical meetings.

3. Public Perception and Controversy

• Polarization in Medicine — Oz’s endorsement of certain controversial health products and practices has divided medical professionals. This could potentially:
  • Lead to heightened scrutiny of the content and speakers at meetings, especially on evidence-based medicine.
  • Create opportunities for debates or panels addressing scientific rigor and misinformation.
• Increased Media Attention — His high-profile nature may draw media coverage to health-related meetings, increasing visibility for certain events.

4. Industry Implications

• Pharmaceutical and Device Sector — Oz’s approach could lead to:
  • Greater focus on lifestyle-related health interventions, shifting priorities for companies sponsoring traditional medical technologies or treatments.
  • Potential budget reallocations toward wellness and public health education initiatives.
• Health-care Innovation — His interest in emerging technologies could spur growth in meetings featuring digital health, AI, and personalized medicine.

5. Global and Environmental Focus

• Broadening Public Health Themes — Under Oz, HHS may prioritize issues like obesity, mental health, and chronic disease prevention, influencing the agendas of medical conferences globally.
• Sustainability and Accessibility — His media campaigns often touch on accessible health-care solutions, which could encourage discussions on equity and environmental health at meetings.

6. Challenges and Opportunities for Meeting Planners

• Balancing Diverse Opinions — Planners may need to account for increased debate and potential controversy, ensuring a platform for balanced, evidence-based dialogue.
• Leveraging Popularity — His name recognition and communication skills could attract broader audiences to events addressing public health and wellness topics.

If Oz heads HHS, his influence could introduce both opportunities and challenges, reshaping medical meetings to emphasize holistic health, innovation, and public engagement while sparking discussions on scientific rigor and public trust in health information.

It will be interesting, to say the least, to see how everything shakes out in the next four years.

Pat Schaumann, CMP, CSEP, DMCP, HMCC, is president of Schaumann Consulting Group and founder and manager of the Healthcare Meeting Compliance Certificate (HMCC) program and Medical Meeting Professional (MMP) Certificate program.