Shared Decision Making in Pharmaceuticals: A Strategy for Market Expansion

[Darryl]

Introduction:

The concept of "shared decision making" (SDM) is a big part of the conversations between nonprofits like Malecare and the pharmaceutical industry. SDM is a collaborative process that involves patients and healthcare providers working together to make healthcare decisions, often integrating patient preferences and values with the best available medical evidence. This essay explores how pharmaceutical companies utilize SDM as a strategic tool to expand their market share.

The Evolution of Shared Decision Making:

Initially, SDM emerged as a patient-centric approach, aiming to empower patients in their healthcare journeys. It marked a shift from paternalistic models where decisions were primarily doctor-driven. Over time, pharmaceutical companies recognized the potential of SDM not just as a patient empowerment tool but also as a business strategy.

Integration of SDM in Marketing Strategies:

Pharmaceutical companies integrate SDM into their marketing strategies in several ways:

Educational Materials and Tools: Companies provide resources to both patients and physicians that facilitate SDM. These resources often include information about various drugs, their benefits, side effects, and comparative effectiveness. By equipping patients with this information, pharmaceutical companies position their products as preferred choices in the decision-making process.

Patient Advocacy and Support Groups: Many pharmaceutical companies actively engage with or even sponsor patient advocacy groups and support programs. These groups play a crucial role in guiding patients through their treatment options, subtly favoring the sponsoring company’s products. Malecare has historically and continues to reject sponsorships and grants regarding SDM.

Training Healthcare Professionals: Pharmaceutical companies often offer training programs for healthcare professionals on the principles of SDM. While these programs are beneficial, they also provide an avenue for companies to promote their products indirectly.

Impact on Market Share:

The impact of SDM on market share can be substantial:

Building Trust and Brand Loyalty: SDM helps in building trust between patients and pharmaceutical brands. When patients feel their preferences are considered, they are more likely to have a positive perception of the drug and, by extension, the company.

Increased Product Demand: Through SDM, patients become more aware of specific drugs and their benefits, potentially leading to increased demand. In conditions where multiple treatment options exist, this awareness can steer decisions towards a particular company’s product.

Differentiation in a Competitive Market: SDM can be a differentiator in a competitive market. Pharmaceutical companies that effectively implement SDM strategies might be seen as more patient-centered, enhancing their reputation and market position.

Ethical Considerations:

While SDM as a marketing strategy has benefits, it also raises ethical considerations. There is barely a fine line between patient empowerment and covert marketing. There's a risk that SDM could be manipulated to favor specific treatments without fully unbiased information.

Conclusion:

SDM represents a paradigm shift in how pharmaceutical companies approach marketing and patient engagement. By adopting SDM, these companies contribute to patient empowerment and strategically position their products to gain a competitive edge. However, the ethical implications of this approach necessitate careful consideration to ensure that patient interests remain at the forefront of healthcare decision-making. The future of SDM in pharmaceuticals hinges on balancing business objectives with patients' genuine health interests and choices. Please support Malecare as we work to push SDM initiatives entirely in support of patients

[Sailing-Todd]

Hi Darryl. I work with the Royal College of Physicians in a patient advocate role and shared decision making is very high on the agenda. I have to admit though that I have never thought of this angle.

Is it that patient engagement and marketing by pharmaceutical companies is different in the UK to the US I wonder?

[Darryl Partner in reply to Sailing-Todd]

Hello Sailing-Todd

The marketing strategies of pharmaceutical companies in the UK and the US differ significantly, primarily due to regulatory environments, healthcare systems, and cultural attitudes toward healthcare and advertising.

Regulatory Environment:

US: In the United States, pharmaceutical companies are allowed to market directly to consumers (Direct-to-Consumer, or DTC advertising). This includes TV commercials, print ads, and online marketing. The US is one of the few countries that permit DTC pharmaceutical advertising.

UK: In the UK, direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs is prohibited. Pharmaceutical companies primarily market to healthcare professionals.

Healthcare System Structure:

US: The US healthcare system is a mix of public and private sector involvement. Insurance companies and private payers play a significant role. This system allows for more aggressive marketing strategies as companies vie for a share in a highly competitive market.

UK: The UK's National Health Service (NHS) is a publicly funded healthcare system. I am not certain, but I think the NHS negotiates directly with pharmaceutical companies, which impacts how these companies market their products.

Cultural Attitudes:

US: There is a greater acceptance of medical advertising among the public in the US. This openness to advertising aligns with the broader advertising culture in the country.

UK: There is generally more skepticism towards pharmaceutical advertising in the UK. The public and healthcare professionals might be less receptive to marketing tactics seen in the US.

Marketing Tactics:

US: Marketing tactics in the US include celebrity endorsements, patient testimonials, and emotional appeals in advertising. Companies also invest heavily in online and social media marketing.

UK: In the UK, pharmaceutical marketing is more informational and science-focused, targeting healthcare professionals. Tactics include sponsoring medical education, providing drug samples, and conducting informational seminars.

Spending and Investment:

US: The US sees significantly higher spending on pharmaceutical marketing, reflecting the larger market size and the allowance for DTC advertising.

UK: Marketing budgets in the UK are generally smaller, with a focus on efficiency and targeting the healthcare sector rather than the general public.

Impact on Prescribing Habits:

US: Direct-to-consumer advertising can have a direct impact on patient preferences and, subsequently, on prescribing habits of doctors.

UK: The influence is more indirect, with pharmaceutical companies providing information and education to healthcare professionals, who then make prescribing decisions.

[Sailing-Todd in reply to Darryl]

Thank you for such a brilliantly clear and detailed reply. I think all your points are absolutely true. It would be interesting to follow them to see how the two different societies work on other levels, and the process by which they evolved into those different ways of working.

If one is raised and living in one culture I guess it is like a fish not knowing that it lives in water, it just does. We need to live long term elsewhere to understand the differences, and there are clearly many when it comes to medical care.

Of course the big philosophical question is which is the best one? There are so many factors to take on board!