Are details really having the desired effect?
Direct-to-physician activities account for the bulk of spending, with $5.3 billion going to physician detailing visits.
By on Dec 7, 2005Direct-to-physician activities account for the bulk of spending, with $5.3 billion going to physician detailing visits. And free drug samples distributed during these visits are valued at roughly $16.4 billion.
"As the cost of prescription drugs continues to escalate, increased attention is being focused on the role of pharmaceutical marketing practices as a cause of higher drug prices," says Robert Jacobson, professor of marketing at the University of Washington Business School and co-author of the paper study in the December issue of Management Science.
"The concern that pharmaceutical marketing practices compromise physician integrity and have exacerbated increases in public health costs has prompted government actions at both the federal and state levels, Jacobson adds. The key public policy issue is the extent to which the industry's promotional tactics lead to an increase in appropriate versus inappropriate use of drugs in a cost-effective manner."
In the study, researchers analyzed data for three drugs widely prescribed by some 74,000 physicians over a two-year period to investigate the effect of pharmaceutical sales representatives on physician prescribing behavior. For each of the drugs in the study, Jacobson and Natalie Mizik, assistant professor of marketing at Columbia University, assessed the effects of changes in the numbers of sales calls and free samples on the number of new prescriptions the physician issued.
Although the effects of detailing and sampling differ across drugs, the impact of the marketing activities on physician prescribing behavior ranged only from very small to modest for each of the drugs studied. For the three drugs in the study, researchers found it would take, on average, from 0.5 to 6.5 more visits by pharmaceutical sales representatives to induce one new prescription. And it would require 6.5 to 73 additional free samples to induce one new prescription.
According to Jacobson, for the largest-selling drug in the study, one of the most widely prescribed drugs in the United States, it would take approximately three additional visits by a pharmaceutical sales representative to induce one new prescription. And it would take 26 additional free samples to induce one new prescription.
Jacobson says that, contrary to popular belief, physicians are not easy targets readily persuaded by salespeople, but rather are tough sells as evidenced by the minimal influence of sales activities on their prescribing behavior. According to Jacobson, the most important factor explaining the limited effect of sales representatives is that physicians know they have other sources of information. Scientific papers, advice from colleagues and a physician's own training and experience also influence prescribing practices and, he says, most physicians view these sources as far more reliable and trustworthy than salespeople.
"Additionally, many physicians are skeptical of or hold negative attitudes toward sales representatives," he says. "Physicians recognize that information presented is biased toward the promoted drug and is unlikely to be objective or even accurate. Thus, physicians often discount information received from a sales representative. As physicians have access to alternative sources of information, which are more highly regarded, it is no wonder that the salesperson's influence is minimal."
Jacobson adds that pharmaceutical marketing aimed directly at consumers might be expected to have greater impact. And as evidenced by the data from IAG outlined in today's second feature, consumers find at least some pharma promotional messages memorable and motivating.
Certainly some food for thought as marketing budgets come under scrutiny for in the New Year