Chaudhury Spandana, Kuldeep G B, Swati P V, Lekshmi R S, Manohar Balaji, Mahajan Akriti, Duseja Shilpa, Tiwari Rahul
Department of Respiratory Medicine, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Dr. D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth University, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Hospital Administration, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rajkot, Gujarat, India.
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Jul;16(Suppl 3):S2591-S2594. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_247_24. Epub 2024 Jun 7.
Pharmaceutical promotion is the principal aspect of the healthcare system. In this study, we aimed to portray the opinion of doctors and medical representatives (MRs) on conventional pharmaceutical ways (usage of promotional or educational paper materials and physician drug samples) for pharmaceutical promotion.
In this cross-sectional observational study, data were collected from doctors and MRs across India using self-administered Google forms. Data were analyzed, and results were drawn.
A total of 314 doctors and 272 MRs participated in the study. As per 95.5% of doctors, continuing medical education (CME)/books/online information is the most common and convenient method to update medical knowledge, whereas 67.9% of MRs also think the same. Only 5.5% of doctors prefer paper material provided by pharmaceutical companies to update their knowledge. Most doctors say paper materials provided by pharmaceutical companies contribute less than 25% to product information, rather CME, books, and online information contribute significantly. MRs also think similarly. 66.2% of MRs agree that more than 25% of paper material gets wasted due to non-distribution. 73.2% of doctors and 75.4% of MRs agree that the use of paper materials for product promotion is not cost-effective, even if it contributes to deforestation. Only 51% of doctors use more than 50% of medical samples in patient care and only half of doctors and MRs think expired medical samples are disposed of correctly. 56.1% of doctors and 71.4% of MRs think a significant amount of medical samples are wasted and are hazardous to the environment.
Both doctors and MRs are of the opinion that the conventional method of paper promotion, that is, paper material and drug samples, is not cost-effective and also not eco-friendly. Hence, need to rethink - is there a need to change with time?
药品推广是医疗保健系统的主要方面。在本研究中,我们旨在描述医生和医药代表(MRs)对传统药品推广方式(使用促销或教育纸质材料及医师药品样本)的看法。
在这项横断面观察性研究中,使用自行填写的谷歌表格从印度各地的医生和医药代表收集数据。对数据进行分析并得出结果。
共有314名医生和272名医药代表参与了该研究。根据95.5%的医生表示,继续医学教育(CME)/书籍/在线信息是更新医学知识最常见且便捷的方法,而67.9%的医药代表也持相同看法。只有5.5%的医生更喜欢制药公司提供的纸质材料来更新知识。大多数医生表示,制药公司提供的纸质材料对产品信息的贡献不到25%,相比之下,继续医学教育、书籍和在线信息的贡献显著。医药代表也有类似看法。66.2%的医药代表同意,超过25%的纸质材料因未分发而被浪费。73.2%的医生和75.4%的医药代表同意,使用纸质材料进行产品推广不具有成本效益,即使这会导致森林砍伐。只有51%的医生在患者护理中使用超过50%的药品样本,只有一半的医生和医药代表认为过期药品样本得到了正确处理。56.1%的医生和71.4%的医药代表认为大量药品样本被浪费且对环境有害。
医生和医药代表都认为传统的纸质推广方法,即纸质材料和药品样本,既不具有成本效益,也不环保。因此,需要重新思考——是否需要与时俱进做出改变?