Promotional methods used by representatives of drug companies: A prospective survey in general practice

Jesper Schramm, Morten Andersen, Kirstin Vach, Jakob Kragstrup, Jens Peter Kampmann, Jens Søndergaard*

*Corresponding author af dette arbejde

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

16 Citationer (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. To examine the extent and composition of pharmaceutical industry representatives' marketing techniques with a particular focus on drug sampling in relation to drug age. Design. A group of 47 GPs prospectively collected data on drug promotional activities during a six-month period, and a sub-sample of 10 GPs furthermore recorded the representatives' marketing techniques in detail. Setting. Primary healthcare. Subjects. General practitioners in the County of Funen, Denmark. Main outcome measures. Promotional visits and corresponding marketing techniques. Results. The 47 GPs recorded 1050 visits corresponding to a median of 19 (range 3 to 63) per GP in the six months. The majority of drugs promoted (52%) were marketed more than five years ago. There was a statistically significant decline in the proportion of visits where drug samples were offered with drug age, but the decline was small OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.95;0.98) per year. Leaflets (68%), suggestions on how to improve therapy for a specific patient registered with the practice (53%), drug samples (48%), and gifts (36%) were the most frequently used marketing techniques. Conclusion. Drug-industry representatives use a variety of promotional methods. The tendency to hand out drug samples was statistically significantly associated with drug age, but the decline was small.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftScandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care
Vol/bind25
Udgave nummer2
Sider (fra-til)93-97
Antal sider5
ISSN0281-3432
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2007

Bibliografisk note

Funding Information:
The study was funded by a grant from the Institute for Rational Pharmacotherapy, the Danish Medicines Agency and the Foundation for Education and Quality Development. Conflict of interests: None.

Citationsformater