Pssst…. I Heard About This Drug And…
8 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // July 23rd, 2008 // 10:22 am
For all the money spent on consumer advertising, word of mouth may work just as well. Of course, a consumer may have heard about a drug from an ad, but a survey suggests that the buzz spreads from there. Seventy-four percent of word-of-mouth exchanges about a prescription med takes place in person, and 69 percent of that info is deemed credible, according to the Keller Fay Group research firm, which queried 13,750 people between June 2006 and July 2007.
Interestingly, when a family member shares, the info is given more prominence, even when considering a physician or other healthcare professional - 28 percent versus 17 percent. And effectiveness is the leading topic discussed - 37 percent chat about whether a drug does the job, compared with 28 percent reviewing the illness, 17 percent discussing side effects and 13 percent talking about cost. Here are some slides…
Dan
Word of mouth should not be encouraged in regards to anything used in healthcare. We are not dealing with a new brand of shoe here.
I’m amazed that such organizations treat health care with the same strategies.
Brad
No, we’re certainly not dealing with a new brand of shoe. Which is precisely why word of mouth is essential to decisions involving drug use of any kind. Who is more likely to be sympathetic to the needs and lifestyle of a potential consumer–an HMO physician or a close friend?
As long as information about the costs, risks, and effects of pharmaceuticals is available and accessed by consumers, why shouldn’t we trust our friends and family members to recommend the drugs that worked for them?
There’s no distinction between “patients” and “consumers” in the health care market. It deserves some thought whether in the long run this will result in greater empowerment or more opportunities for organizations like Kay Feller and the industries they represent to take advantage of individuals.
Dan
Went on thier website, and Merck is the only pharmaceutical client they have. Incredible.
Seth
A little bit of effort on-the-ground (in the form of grassroots education) speaks to this point exactly: patients are human. Humans gather regularly (most do, anyway) for social, religious, family or other (countless) reasons.
We can’t ignore that 1. most people consider their health very important, 2. most people will likely share positive (and negative) experiences regarding their health and 3. most people will trust those second-or-third hand experiences more than those of their healthcare professionals.
If patients are consumers, and consumers are humans, then patients are humans. Let’s treat them that way.
Seth
A little bit of effort on-the-ground (in the form of grassroots education) speaks to this point exactly: patients are human. Humans gather regularly (most do, anyway) for social, religious, family or other (countless) reasons.
We can’t ignore that 1. most people consider their health very important, 2. most people will likely share positive (and negative) experiences regarding their health and 3. most people will trust those second-or-third hand experiences more than those of their healthcare professionals. You would too, if you didn’t know any better.
If patients are consumers, and consumers are humans, then patients are humans. Let’s treat them that way.
Dingle
Seems to me like this firm is simply performing a social networking road show hoping someone will listen:
http://www.thebusinessbuddha.com/blog/?p=60
I found nothing informative or surprising in this presentation.
harpy
Old news, new word - “murketing” a combination of “murky” and “marketing.” Other industries have been playing with this for a while. The most recent story I’ve seen dealt with viral videos that are covert ad campaigns (sorry, no link, but I think it was in Salon or Wired). One example given was a video that showed a group of kids popping popcorn by pointing their cell phones at the kernels. There is also the phenomenon of hiring attractive people to hang out near the target market, strike up conversations, and casually mention product. Secret sales reps.
Jaynesday
I agree that personal communications about the performance of any product is the ultimate way to understand if a product is right for you.
I’ve suggested a more coordinated form of “Word of Mouth” that I think might be helpful. It would be like a Consumers Reports for drugs and devices. It has been very successful for other consumer’s goods both from the customer and manufacturers point of view.
Of course it would need a higher level of control and support for drugs and devices to maintain validity and security and of course it would be *divorced* of any pharma influence.
The basic method would be very simple:
1. Consumer has a health problem
2. Consumer sees the doctor – Doctor makes a prescription (Consulting with the patient using that drug’s current consumer report and goes over any prevalent side effects reported by other similar consumers taking the same drug)
3. Patient takes drug – after a determined amount of time the patient fills out a questionnaire that is tailored to the drug used.
4. Results are forwarded to the doctor – Follow-up visit schedule if needed, especially if side effects are reported. Doctor can also input to the report as needed.
5. Results are passed on to the 3 rd party compiler (Consumers Report). – Results are used to score the drug according to performance criteria tailored to the drug. You then have 5 star through 1 star grading of all drugs/devices (or some form of grading) along with cost information – (Results are used in step 2 to help other patients and doctors make decisions on what drugs to take)
Questions might include
1. Has the drug perform as expected? Y/N
2. Have there been any noticeable side affects? Y/N
Explain – (please see doctor)
3. Is the drug priced appropriately? Y/N
4. Other medications taken
5. General health data of the patient
6. Environment that the patient works in
7. Name of company manufacturing the drug or device (I threw this one in to make a point that this could be used as a way to monitor the performance of a drug/device company as a whole)
8. Other I’m sure….
Also I would recommend that no advertising be allowed on a drug until adequate data could be compiled by the 3 rd party reporting company for publication.
Also note – Concerning this article – The Kay Feller Group Research firm appears to advise pharma companies on how to get their “Word of Mouth” into the public forum. The question would be why do they feel it is necessary when advertising is meant to do the same? Could it be as harpy says, a covert form of persuasion?