Posted by Sunnely on June 20, 2001, at 23:09:21
In reply to Drug company advertising to patients, posted by Jane D on June 20, 2001, at 19:55:57
Hi Jane,
From a 1999 article on DTC:
A quiet revolution is taking place in the marketing of prescription drugs. Full-page color ads appear in many popular magazines, usually accompanied by a message that the product is available through the reader's doctor. TV and radio promotions are becoming more common. This type of advertising campaign, known as direct-to-consumer (DTC) is gaining momentum within the pharmaceutical industry.
A prominent stimulus in the growth of DTC marketing was the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's decision to relax its guidelines regarding the promotion of prescription drugs. The FDA Modernization Act (FDAMA) of 1997 is shaping new advertising policies. In 1997, the FDA permitted prescription drug advertising on TV and radio.
In the first 6 months of 1997, five of the largest pharmaceutical companies (Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis Pharmaceutical Corp., Glaxo Wellcome Inc., Pfizer Inc., and Schering-Ploguh Corp.) spent over $100 million on TV advertisements for prescription drugs. The total budget for DTC advertising, including magazines, TV, newspapers and radio, approached $1 billion in 1997. And DTC spending was expected to double by the year 2000. Approximately 30 prescription products have been the topic of DTC consumer TV or radio ads to date (1999); allergy drugs account for the most.
THE WEB IS NOT IMMUNE
The internet is not immune to DTC. The internet is an attractive avenue for advertising, partly due to the relatively low cost of establishing a Web site. Consumers pay to read the information provided with their connect fees. In addition, there is the advantage of being able to reach a worldwide audience. However, since prescription drugs are not approved for the same uses in all countries, this raises questions about the benefits of www advertising.
WHAT DO PHYSICIANS THINK OF DTC ADVERTISING OF DRUGS?
According to the industry journal Pharmaceutical Executives, 61% of 5,000 physicians surveyed would like pharmaceutical manufacturers to either discontinue or decrease DTC advertising. This is not likely to happen for one simple reason: DTC advertising appears to work. It was reported that 31% of consumers who have seen a DTC advertisement asked their doctor about that specific medication - a strong argument for the industry to continue DTC marketing.
ABUSES OF DTC ADVERTISING
Since 1997, the FDA has sent 18 letters to manufacturers critizing their ads. The agency cited drug makers for minimizing or omitting risk information, using distracting visuals, incompletely communicating an indication or limitations of a drug's use, and including unsubstantiated superiority claims.
HOW DO CONSUMERS BENEFIT FROM DTC ADVERTISING?
Since most consumers have no medical background, DTC advertising clearly has a goal of creating brand awareness. The best examples, like the Astra Internet site for Prilosec, also provide education. As many diseases are undertreated (high blood pressure, high cholesterol), one role of educational advertising is to prompt consumer to see the doctor, get tested and discuss options for treatment. This may benefit many people who otherwise might no consult a physician.
Pharmaceutical manufacturers are still focusing their main promotional resources on physicians, who ultimately decide which medicine a patient receives. The amount of money currently spent on DTC advertising is only about 25% of the industry's total marketing budget. Nevertheless, the increase in DTC advertising repsents a departure from the traditional way prescription-only products are promoted. How the public responds remains to be seen.
Bottom line is, DTC works and most likely here to stay.
*****************************
> Doctors Debate Ban on Drug Ads, Associated Press, Sunday, June 17, 2001
> http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_2266.html
>
> There's a piece here about the AMA arguing whether they should urge the govt to ban patient directed drug ads. I don't know what they ultimately decided.
>
> Excerpts:
> "The ads can undermine doctors' credibility, especially if a physician thinks an advertised drug isn't the best choice for a patient who demands it, said Dr. Angelo Agro of the AMA's New Jersey delegation, which drafted the proposal. "
>
> "Ads by their nature are biased and compressed, and driven more by drug companies' financial concerns than by concern for the patients' best interest, said Agro, an ear, nose and throat specialist from Voorhees, N.J."
>
> What I like about this proposal is its pure nerve. Rather than be prepared to answer your questions about why you should/shouldn't use a particular drug they would rather prevent you from asking. I really fail to see how this preserves credibility. And of course the physician's information about new drugs tends to come from drug salesmen - in essence advertising. I think we might be better off letting the direct to consumer advertising continue and banning advertising to doctors.
>
> From the same article:
> "Several doctors told committee members that they like the ads since they may encourage patients who wouldn't otherwise seek needed medical attention to schedule a doctor's visit."
>
> "Psychiatrist Dr. Saul Levin said ads for antidepressants, for example, help take the stigma out of depression and may make sufferers realize they're not alone."
>
> I'm curious. Has anybody here decided to see a doctor after seeing one of these ads? I have to admit that when I was in denial I was very good at it. I very determinedly ignored ads, magazine quizzes, and textbook descriptions as applying only to other people. Still, I wonder if seeing the ads night after night on television wouldn't eventually sink in. Has anybody ever been watching one of them and had that glimmer of recognition?
>
> Jane
poster:Sunnely
thread:67287
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20010618/msgs/67311.html