Department of Health Services Research, Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, 795 El Camino Real, Ames Building, Palo Alto, CA 94301, United States.
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Oct;73(7):995-1002. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.06.064. Epub 2011 Jul 27.
Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs is the most common form of health communication Americans are exposed to. The effects of DTCA on prescription requests and utilization are well established, but little is known about the effects of advertisements on health behaviors. Many advertisements, especially those promoting drugs to prevent or treat cardiovascular disease, refer to lifestyle change as a way to improve health. However, no studies have examined how consumers interpret these frequently ambiguous messages. We used in-depth interviews with 45 participants, recruited in Los Angeles, USA between April 2007 and July 2008, to explore perceptions of 5 advertisements for drugs that prevent or treat cardiovascular disease (Lipitor(®), Vytorin(®), Zetia(®), Caduet(®), Plavix(®)). We found that participants interpreted advertising messages within their own life context and identified four trajectories for enacting behavior change versus taking prescription drugs: Negotiators, Avoiders, Embracers and Jumpstarters. Underlying these four typologies were beliefs about whether lifestyle change was something an individual could do or was willing to do. Our results also show how an advertisement narrative could potentially shift perceptions of causality by suggesting that high cholesterol is primarily hereditary, thereby obviating the need for lifestyle change. Some participants stated that they would prefer lifestyle change to a particular prescription drug, but felt that others would be more likely to embrace taking a prescription drug. This "Third Person Effect" may be masking participants' intentions by identifying a more socially desirable route to therapeutic change. These findings raise questions about how the typologies are distributed in the population and how advertising may shift consumers' beliefs over time, thereby contributing to new forms of medicalization. Effective regulation of DTCA may require expanding scrutiny beyond the accuracy of claims about benefits and risks, to also considering the broader narratives in which these claims are made.
直接面向消费者的药品广告(DTCA)是美国人最常见的健康传播形式。DTCA 对处方请求和使用的影响已得到充分证实,但对于广告对健康行为的影响知之甚少。许多广告,尤其是那些宣传预防或治疗心血管疾病的药物的广告,都提到生活方式的改变是改善健康的一种方式。然而,尚无研究探讨消费者如何解释这些经常模棱两可的信息。我们使用深度访谈的方法,对 2007 年 4 月至 2008 年 7 月期间在美国洛杉矶招募的 45 名参与者进行了研究,以探讨他们对 5 种预防或治疗心血管疾病的药物广告(立普妥、辛伐他汀/依折麦布、依泽替米贝、考来维仑/阿托伐他汀、氯吡格雷)的看法。我们发现,参与者会根据自己的生活背景来解释广告信息,并确定了四种采取行为改变与服用处方药的行为模式:协商者、回避者、接受者和跃跃欲试者。这四种类型的背后是对生活方式的改变是否是个人能够或愿意做的信念。我们的研究结果还表明,广告叙事如何通过暗示高胆固醇主要是遗传性的,从而消除生活方式改变的必要性,从而潜在地改变因果关系的看法。一些参与者表示,他们更愿意选择生活方式的改变,而不是特定的处方药,但他们认为其他人更有可能接受服用处方药。这种“第三人效应”可能通过识别一种更符合社会期望的治疗改变途径,掩盖了参与者的意图。这些发现提出了一些问题,即这些类型在人群中的分布情况如何,以及广告如何随着时间的推移改变消费者的信念,从而促成新形式的医学化。对 DTCA 的有效监管可能需要超越对益处和风险的准确性进行审查,扩展到对这些主张所包含的更广泛的叙事进行审查。