Prescription Drug Promotion Research Articles

Promotion of Prescription Drugs and Its Impact on Physicians' Choice Behavior

The authors investigate whether and how pricing and promotional activities influence prescription choice behavior using a comprehensive panel of physicians and data on competitive price and promotional activities. The authors find that physicians are characterized by fairly limited price sensitivity, detailing and samples have a mostly informative effect on physicians, and physicians with a relatively large number of Medicare or health maintenance organization patients are less influenced by promotion than other physicians are.

Direct-to-consumer promotion of prescription drugs. Economic implications for patients, payers and providers.

Spending on outpatient prescription drugs in the US is accelerating rapidly. Although numerous factors are driving this trend, attention has recently focused on the role played by the marketing, promotion and advertising of pharmaceuticals, in particular direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising. In 1997, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a 'guidance' on such mass media promotion. The guidance altered existing FDA rules and effectively permitted pharmaceutical companies to promote prescription drugs on television and radio without giving detailed or even summary information on indications, efficacy or potential adverse effects. Since then, television commercials, in particular, and print advertisements in consumer magazines and newspapers have proliferated rapidly. Pharmaceutical companies spent $US1.8 billion on DTC advertising in 1999, a 40% increase over 1998. This spending in 1999 was heavily concentrated on about 50 drugs. Evidence is growing that DTC promotion of prescription drugs is: (i) alerting consumers to the existence of new drugs and the conditions they treat; (ii) increasing consumer demand for many drugs; (iii) contributing increasingly to the recent sharp increase in the number of prescriptions being dispensed; (iv) raising sales revenues; and, thus, (v) contributing to the higher pharmaceutical costs of health insurers, government and consumers. The public policy issues surrounding DTC advertisements centre on the following questions: (i) are the advertisements leading to the inappropriate clinical use of some drugs? (ii) are the advertisements inducing both consumers and physicians to choose more costly new brand-name drugs over less expensive, but equally effective, older brand or generic drugs? (iii) do television advertisements for prescription drugs contain a balanced amount of information on benefits versus potential adverse effects? and (iv) will the revenue benefits generated by DTC advertising cause pharmaceutical companies to focus more on developing products to treat prevalent but not life-threatening conditions, such as baldness, sexual dysfunction or memory loss? These questions are just beginning to be probed despite prescription drug spending, insurance coverage and payment policies having become major political issues in the US.

The Marketing of Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drugs

The promotion of prescription drugs directly to consumers is a rapidly-growing phenomenon. The regulatory aspects of prescription drug advertising beg the question: To what degree do the ads inform versus persuade consumers? This study examines the advertising appeals of prescription drug advertisements aimed at consumers. A content analysis of prescription drug advertisements in eight popular magazines between 1992 and 1995 was undertaken to develop a typology of appeals used by drug manufacturers to promote their brands. The use of promotional techniques, such as coupons, toll-free numbers and web sites and the incidence of self-diagnostic “tests” in DTC prescription drug ads are also examined.

Regulation of prescription drug promotion: direct-to-consumer advertising

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for regulating the information on prescription drugs disseminated by sponsors to health care providers and consumers to ensure that it is truthful and not misleading, and that it presents a fair balance of benefit and risk information. Thus the public health is both protected and promoted by the dissemination of honest, accurate information about regulated products. This paper discusses the regulatory requirements for promotional materials for prescription drugs and the standards used by the FDA to evaluate these materials. It also discusses the agency's views on direct-to-consumer advertising, the enforcement actions that are available to the FDA, the process used by the FDA to determine what action should be taken and when, and what remedies are available.

The Evolving Role of FDA in Prescription Drug Promotion

This article reviews the contemporary rise of pharmaceutical promotion and FDA's current regulatory policies. Four trends are identified that have spurred a vast increase in the amount and diversification of promotional messages and methods (i.e., evolving technology, new audiences, more sophisticated marketing strategies, and increasingly competitive environments). FDA's surveillance and enforcement activities are discussed. A case history regarding Syntex's promotion of Naprosyn and FDA's reaction is discussed to illustrate how the industry may use a coordinated marketing campaign to violatively promote its products and how FDA enforces the drug advertising law and regulations.

The FDA and Drug Marketing Expenditures

To the Editor.— An article in the November 14, 1990, issue of JAMA , The Federal Regulation of Prescription Drug Advertising and Promotion, 1 was most informative. There was, however, conspicuous failure to address a key question: does the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) consider how much advertising and promotion add to the escalating cost of drugs? An answer to this question is particularly appropriate at this time when there is a public mandate for legislation to control the high cost of medical care.

The Federal Regulation of Prescription Drug Advertising and Promotion

Prescription drug advertising has been regulated by the Food and Drug Administration since 1962. In the past decade, pharmaceutical companies have employed new communication mechanisms to reach physicians and, with increasing frequency, consumers. Examples of physician-oriented promotional activities are medical symposia and teleconferences. Consumer-oriented efforts include press conferences, use of celebrity spokespeople, and direct-to-consumer advertising. The Food and Drug Administration has asserted its legal jurisdiction over these nontraditional promotional activities and is regulating them on a case-by-case basis. As nontraditional promotional efforts become more prevalent, the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory framework must be able to meet the challenges of a changing environment.

The federal regulation of prescription drug advertising and promotion

The federal regulation of prescription drug advertising and promotion

FDA Regulation of Prescription Drug Advertising

Dr Kessler and Mr Pines 1 present a thoughtful and balanced review of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) regulation of prescription drug promotion. In their conclusion, the authors call to mind issues where the need for change is clear and other issues that have long vexed the agency. Mr Pines, a former FDA Associate Commissioner for Public Affairs, is intimately familiar with these issues and has chaired conferences on them in several forums. Many of the presentations from these conferences have been published. 2,3 The article makes some cogent observations. The need to revise the brief summary for use in advertising in a way that makes it readable and more useful is inescapable. The need for governmental oversight of promotional activities involving gifts and other financial inducements to health care providers, such as travel, was made clear in hearings conducted by Sen Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts as early as

FDA regulation of prescription drug advertising

Dr Kessler and Mr Pines¹present a thoughtful and balanced review of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) regulation of prescription drug promotion. In their conclusion, the authors call to mind issues where the need for change is clear and other issues that have long vexed the agency. Mr Pines, a former FDA Associate Commissioner for Public Affairs, is intimately familiar with these issues and has chaired conferences on them in several forums. Many of the presentations from these conferences have been published.^2,3 The article makes some cogent observations. The need to revise the brief summary for use in advertising in a way that makes it readable and more useful is inescapable. The need for governmental oversight of promotional activities involving gifts and other financial inducements to health care providers, such as travel, was made clear in hearings conducted by Sen Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts as early as

Ethical Guidelines for Promotion of Prescription Drugs to Physicians

Ethical Guidelines for Promotion of Prescription Drugs to Physicians

We Need Ethical Guidelines for Promotion of Prescription Drugs to Physicians

We Need Ethical Guidelines for Promotion of Prescription Drugs to Physicians

Persuasion or Information? Promotion and the Shares of Brand Name and Generic Pharmaceuticals

ECONOMISTS have vigorously debated whether advertising and other messages supplied by sellers to buyers represent the efficient provision of information or the exploitation of buyers' imperfect access to it. Many economists now agree that each view commands some truth. Advertising should convey information efficiently where the buyer can easily verify it. But it may engender inefficient rent-seeking outlays by producers able to hamper buyers' gaining of information from alternative sources. For example, if buyers sample product information randomly, an incumbent can "jam" the channels through which entrants transmit their messages by loading the sampled population with messages of his own. Or the incumbent's messages can reinforce buyers' habits so as to reduce their prior expectations of the value of trying an alternative brand.2 If sales promotion is effective (by whatever means) in causing buyers to shift among competing products, it becomes a form of rent-seeking outlay by which sellers bid for the available customers.3 The problem for empirical research is to determine the extent to which seller-supplied information pursues a rent-seeking goal and thus incurs social costs. Those costs must be set against the efficiency advantage of sellers (relative to buyers or

Drug Promotion: The Third World Revisited

In 1973 and 1980 surveys, much of the promotion of prescription drugs in the Third World was found to be marked by gross exaggeration of clinical claims and glossing over of possible serious or fatal adverse reactions. In an expanded survey of the information distributed in 1984 to physicians in the United States, the United Kingdom, and 28 developing nations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, striking changes were noted. Many of the pharmaceutical firms were found to be showing more restraint in limiting their claims in the Third World to those which can be supported by scientific evidence, and far more willingness to disclose serious hazards. The companies discarding a double standard in drug promotion have apparently not suffered any significant loss of profits. There is, however, evident need for further improvement by both multinational and domestic companies. The present study covered 1069 products representing 63 drug entities and fixed combinations, marketed by 303 companies.

Persuasion or Information? The Economics of Prescription Drug Advertising

THE economic and welfare effects of advertising have been extensively studied over the last half-century. However, these efforts have not led to a consensus either as to the effects or the value of advertising. Economists continue to reach polar conclusions that appear to be derived mainly from preconceptions of the social desirability of advertising. On the one hand is research that emphasizes promotion's ability to create "artificial" product differentiation and thereby produce informational confusion.1 This line of research stresses the empirical association of extensive advertising with high concentration and high accounting profits-evidence judged to support increased market power and entry barrier effects.2 A contrary body of research emphasizes the value of advertising in providing information and, hence, in promoting competition.3 The empirical findings most consistent with this view are that prices paid by consumers in (selected) markets are lower with advertising than without it.4

New Laws are Needed to Regulate the Drug Industry

Senator Nelson, the chief Congressional critic of pharmaceutical advertising, charges that the promotion of prescription drugs is the principal reason for irrational prescribing and over-medication. He believes that the increase of drug indications through advertising for non-medical conditions and intensive promotional campaigns all contribute to fostering the development of a drug-oriented society. He is particularly critical of the use of detail men and their uncontrolled promotional practices. The passive stance of the AMA and the Federal government, he believes, permits profit-oriented drug companies to determine the quality of health care throughout the country. In his presentation, he questions the ethics of both the drug industry and the medical profession in permitting such collaboration and asks, “Is drug advertising really necessary?”

Patterns of Prescription Drug Use: The Role of Promotion

Promotional efforts directed to the health professions by pharmaceutical manufacturers, and their alleged association with excessive prescribing and drug abuse are the subject of this paper. The paper contends that claims to the effect that legitimate drug prescribing patterns and promotional efforts merely mirror—or even may cause—drug abuse are not factually supported. Assertions to the effect that physicians rely primarily on advertising in making prescribing decisions are not borne out by studies of the various factors which bear upon those decisions, the paper points out. It describes the extent of prescription drug promotion, and utilization and notes that physician prescribing of psychoactive drugs has lagged behind overall prescription growth trends, in contrast to the accelerating misuse and abuse of this class of medications in the community at large.