Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women's Hospital will strictly limit the right of its doctors to testify in court or serve as paid advisors to attorneys, following questions raised in the case of a doctor who was a researcher, medical journal editor, legal consultant.

That doctor and the conflict-of-interest questions which arose around him prompted the hospital to draft new regulations which should take effect within the next two months, hospital spokesperson Terri Hornbach-Torres said yesterday.

The regulations will require doctors who want to act as "expert witnesses" or paid legal consultants to request prior approval from their department heads, Hornbach-Torres said.

Harvard Medical School followed suit, revising its policy to require professors to list legal consulting work on their annual disclosure forms, Medical School spokesperson Keren R. McGinity said yesterday.

"The clarifications made to the existing policy on conflict of interest and commitment were prompted by the report from the Brigham and Women's Hospital regarding the activities of two of our faculty members," McGinity said of the Medical School's revised policy, which will take effect this winter.

The policy changes for Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Medical School follow an 11-month investigation into the activities of two doctors, Peter H. Schur and Matthew Liang.

The investigation began after an Associated Press story last December revealed Schur was working as a $300-an-hour consultant and expert witness for law firms defending silicone implant makers in lawsuits brought by women.

At the same time, Schur edited the journal Arthritis and Rheumatism and published his own article defending the safety of the implants while working on two major studies of their health effects.

Liang, who served as associate editor of Arthritis and Rheumatism and was working on one of those studies, stepped forward after the AP story ran and acknowledged that he had also worked for law firms defending silicone implant makers.

Both Schur and Liang resigned from a Harvard study on the safety of breast implants that was sponsored by Dow Corning Corp., the largest defendant in the implant suits for which the two doctors had served as consultants.

A committee of three senior physicians completed their investigation into the activities of Schur and Liang earlier this month.

"Brigham and Women's has concluded that there is no evidence of bias in their research or their scientific judgment," Chief Medical Officer George E. Thibualt said in a statement.

"The hospital has informed both physicians that, although they did not violate any explicit hospital policy in doing this work, they exercised poor judgment in allowing their various activities as researchers, editors, authors and experts to overlap in such a way as to create the appearance of a possible conflict of interest," Thibault said.

Harvard Medical School also issued a statement which said the school's Standing Committee on Conflicts of Interest and Commitment found that no school policies had been violated, but criticized Liang and Schur for "exercis[ing] poor judgment."

Brigham and Women's Hospital will require external oversight by scientists from outside the hospital to attest to the integrity of all breast implant research conducted at the hospital