Medical Planners Are Exhausted

Medical meetings compliance experts were on hand at Convening Leaders 2026 in Philadelphia to provide attendees with up-to-date guidance. Photo by Jacob Slaton / Whatever Media Group

If you sat in the Global Compliance Focus Group at PCMA Convening Leaders in January in Philadelphia and listened to senior medical meeting leaders talk about international compliance, what you would have heard was exhaustion.

Patricia M. Andrade

The focus group participants were experienced executives responsible for large U.S.-based medical conferences with meaningful international participation built into their identity and their economics. They already know MedTech Europe, AIFA, EFPIA, and the rest of the compliance acronyms. What they are struggling with is the reality of managing compliance — seen as a moving target — while also running a meeting.

The focus group was structured as a conversation. Sara Abanto from Ethical MedTech’s Conference Vetting System (CVS) — the independent, centralized compliance process operated by MedTech Europe that reviews third-party medical education events for compliance with the MedTech Europe and Mecomed codes of ethical business practice — traveled from Europe to Philadelphia. Planners in the focus group were able to ask her direct questions, test real scenarios, and hear how expectations are being interpreted in practice.

The focus group session was convened by ABTS Convention Services and attendees received a CVS compliance guide written by ABTS as a reference point, but the value came from what planners surfaced when they spoke candidly.

The Complexity Layer

International attendance introduces complexity well before registration opens. Visa timelines and political uncertainty, administration of scholarships and grants, and early compliance considerations all tie to sponsorship structure and scientific program content. These issues are no longer isolated to a single phase. They affect program design, contracting, and internal decision-making throughout the planning cycle.

The workload concern was consistent. International compliance adds layers of work that touch program build, registration structure, marketing language, housing decisions, sponsor approvals, and attendee logistics, all at different times. Requirements evolve and do not always align with each other.

The larger concern was practical: When workload surges and uncertainty makes decisions risky, overwhelmed teams can decide to narrow their exposure. If you do not participate in international compliance, there is no added scrutiny. The risk is that teams may unwillingly cause international decline because they cannot absorb the pressures of a growing workload and a shrinking margin of error.

The Timing Disconnect

Scientific meetings are not static. Changes are expected and normal. Adapting to late-breaking science is part of the value proposition. Compliance, on the other hand, rewards early certainty.

Country-specific requirements can demand detailed programs, speaker names, and session topics 70 to 120 days in advance. Many associations finalize programs and manage scientific agendas that evolve over time and are locked much closer to the meeting date. Abanto clarified that CVS accepts preliminary programs at earlier review stages, but country-level legislation remains difficult to reconcile with real-world program management timelines.

Planners asked a blunt question: When you are required to provide information to a regulatory body but cannot guarantee its veracity, what is the right thing to do? Submit the incomplete, still-in-flux program or pull back and not participate in the process entirely? (Keep reading for some recommendations about that.)

Fragmentation and Inconsistency

Planners described compliance as involving multiple overlapping frameworks: self-imposed industry codes like Ethical MedTech and EFPIA, country-specific requirements from Italy’s AIFA, France’s Loi Bertrand, Korea, and India, accrediting bodies like ACCME and eACCME, and internal company policies that may or may not apply consistently across regions.

The central challenge is that requirements change frequently and do not always align across systems. Several participants noted that practices acceptable one year were not acceptable the next.

Abanto emphasized a point that was simple but important: Prior approval does not guarantee future approval. Each submission is reviewed independently based on current criteria. This changes how teams set expectations internally.

Financial Pressures

Beyond the codes themselves, planners pointed to issues that compound the burden of managing international attendance: higher cancellation rates among international attendees, attrition tied to visa delays, longstanding contracts that may no longer align with compliant location criteria, and restrictions on promoting pre- or post-meeting activities despite destination or partner expectations.

Destination marketing has been particularly tricky to navigate. Domestic audiences and stakeholders expect meetings to promote the experience of being on-site, featuring optional activities around the meeting in the host city. International sponsor compliance requires education-only marketing. Planners described being caught between what they need to do to drive domestic attendance and how that approach differs when trying to preserve international eligibility.

Compliance issues have real financial consequences. Housing attrition, vendor commitments, registration packaging decisions, and marketing timelines become liabilities when requirements shift after contracts are signed and promotions are live.

What Planners Asked For

The requests were practical and consistent: Help us but also consider our needs.

Tell us how. If the meeting is noncompliant, tell us how to fix it. What can be changed while preserving the intent? What is the compliant alternative? What wording or separation would make this acceptable? There was a clear ask for examples, scenarios, and practical adjustments.

Explain why. Explain the logic behind the decision so the team can carry that reasoning forward for next year’s meeting. Meetings have many decision-makers, and everyone needs to understand why. Planners want plain-language reasoning that can be shared with education, marketing, exhibits, and leadership.

Do not treat past outcomes as precedent. This was a major friction point. Abanto was clear: Each event is evaluated on its own merits against current code. Planners need this understanding to be reinforced internally so leadership does not assume past compliance guarantees future compliance.

Scale compliance education. Participants pointed to the need for self-service tools, structured FAQs, scenario libraries, and fast triage mechanisms so routine questions do not become a series of meetings and escalations.

Acknowledge the financial risk. Planners were explicit that compliance issues create exposure. Decisions made 12 to 18 months in advance can become financially untenable if requirements change or submissions are rejected late in the planning cycle.

What Exists Now

The challenges are not new, and some practical approaches have been documented and tested.

For the destination marketing conflict, the dual-site strategy works. The primary conference website focuses on scientific content, speakers, and logistics. No destination imagery, no optional tour promotion. A separate microsite, managed by the host city’s CVB, handles destination content independently: hotels, dining, culture, etc. This solution has been previously accepted by the CVS.

For registration and hospitality structure, separation is required. Entertainment, social activities, guest packages, and childcare must be charged separately and paid directly by the health-care professional. Registration fees cover only scientific content and related logistics: meeting space, educational materials, and reasonable meals tied to the program. This requires clear itemization in all registration materials and transparent billing that distinguishes what is sponsored from what is optional. The solution may be to have a clear international registration category that focuses only on education and excludes the fun add-ons that drive domestic participation. International attendees can then make the decision to add on these activities at their own expense.

For timing conflicts between CVS deadlines and program finalization, preliminary submission has become standard practice. Planners submit CVS applications with draft agendas clearly labeled as subject to change based on scientific developments. Abanto confirmed that CVS accepts preliminary programs at earlier review stages.

For submission logistics, the 50-day deadline is firm and the requirements are specific. Materials must be submitted no later than 50 days before the event begins. All required documents must be uploaded directly to the portal; links are also accepted. Materials must be in final or near-final format at least 35 days before the event. Submissions made after the deadline will not be reviewed. Incomplete submissions lacking required documents by 35 days will be marked as “Not Assessed.” Planning backward from that date means beginning document collection at least 90 days out.

For location and venue decisions, the standard is clear. Select cities known for having health care, academia, or research infrastructure — not known for leisure tourism. Avoid scheduling during the host city’s peak vacation season. Choose venues designed for business meetings: conference centers, academic institutions, and business hotels. Avoid properties with attached golf, spa, or casino facilities (or even properties with names that include “Resort,” “Disney,” or “Beach”). Document the rationale for site selection based on access, scientific relevance, and professional infrastructure.

What Could Exist

Some of the friction points planners described could be addressed through changes in how CVS operates or through new resources built specifically for the U.S. medical meeting market.

Compliance guidance during the planning phase. For large medical conferences, the program is rarely the compliance issue once submitted. In practice, most of the time, non-compliance comes down to marketing language and entertainment bundled into registration. Mentions of golf zones, puppy-petting stations, welcome parties at music venues with live musicians, or childcare services included free with registration are elements that trigger rejections. These are all real cases for 2025-26 U.S.-based meetings.

The real problem is timing. By the time a planner is ready to submit to compliance authorities, the website content has been built, the entertainment has been contracted, and the venues and services are locked in. These decisions are made 12 to 18 months before the event, and by the time they reach the submission stage, they are already contracted commitments with financial exposure attached.

What planners need is compliance review during the planning process itself, when these decisions are still being made. This is not something CVS is structured to provide, but it is a service gap that could be filled by industry partners who specialize in international compliance and understand both the MedTech Europe standards and the operational realities of U.S. medical meetings.

Published guidelines on preliminary programs. Planners can already submit early and add the program later, but there is uncertainty about what level of detail is sufficient when the program portion is submitted. Clear standards would reduce risk and increase early submission rates. For example, preliminary programs must include confirmed session topics with descriptions, names of the faculty leading the educational sessions, and proposed timelines. CVS is checking for hours of continuous education.

What We Are Committing to Build

Two recommendations came directly from planners in the focus group and are valuable enough that they should be accessible to the entire market.

Standardized marketing language templates. A public library of compliant and non-compliant language examples for website homepage copy, registration emails, social media posts, and destination logistics language. Examples of what works and what does not would give planners a reference point before launching campaigns and would prevent the most common compliance violation.

Scenario library and decision trees. A searchable database of common questions with clear compliant and non-compliant examples. Coffee breaks during educational hours (compliant). Chair massage stations included in registration (non-compliant). Chair massage as optional paid add-on (compliant). Decision trees for gray areas like “is this activity entertainment or education?” would create consistency and reduce the volume of routine clarification requests.

ABTS will approach CVS to collaborate on building these resources. If they are endorsed by CVS and made publicly available, they would reduce review burden on CVS, increase first-time compliance rates, and give planners tools they can use during the planning process when decisions are still flexible. These tools should be accessible to any planner working to keep their meeting internationally compliant.

The Takeaway

The most revealing aspect of the conversation was that every professional in that room understood the value of compliance, wanted global participation, and wanted to follow the rules. They just need help with the workload and for the governing bodies to heed their needs as well.

Disclosure: ABTS Convention Services convened the discussion at PCMA Convening Leaders 2026 and provided attendees with an educational reference guide. Sara Abanto of Ethical MedTech participated to answer questions related to CVS. This article reflects observations from that onsite discussion.

This article was neither authored nor endorsed by the Conference Vetting System (CVS). The CVS has not reviewed the substance or content of this article. For authoritative information, the only reliable sources remain the MedTech Europe Code of Ethical Business Practice and the official Ethical MedTech website.

Patricia M. Andrade is executive vice president of international marketing and compliance for ABTS Convention Services.