The Changing Face of Medical Education
pharmafile | May 23, 2007 | Feature | Medical Communications, Sales and Marketing |Â Â medical educationÂ
Is Medical Education the new PR?
Phil Sheldon, Managing Director, Resolute Communications:
Clients are increasingly waking up to the fact that medical education and public relations are simply arms of the same discipline.
Both work closely with third parties to communicate important messaging, and both rely heavily on the integrity and independence of the third party to give the message meaning.
Instead of separating them into two competing silos, the most effective way is to use these tools synergistically, working across the healthcare communications continuum with a complementary strategy and overlapping tactics. A key example is, of course, the idea of working with key opinion leaders where the key opinion leader is the lead investigator on a clinical trial who then also acts as the primary author on a clinical paper, presents their findings at a medical symposium, and is then interviewed by the media to translate high science for a lay audience.
Caroline Almeida, Corporate and Business Communications Manager & Will Whitaker, Medical Education Manager, Bristol-Myers Squibb:
Med ed and PR have important, yet distinct roles. In the past, med ed's focus was limited to the clinical aspects of a disease and its treatment. Today, it has evolved into a discipline that also evaluates the outcome and impact of choice in medication on healthcare providers and patients.
Med ed remains much more specific than PR in content and audience, primarily focusing on healthcare professionals. PR differs in that its content and audience are generally broader, addressing a wider range of issues and encompassing the general public in some cases. Med ed and PR can both deliver effective results in their own right.
Dan Donovan, Principal, Envision Pharma:
Medical education initiatives span a diverse assortment of programmes and dissemination vehicles, so lumping them all together under the single banner med ed is unfair. Further complicating the issue is that in today's politically charged environment, PR and pharmaceuticals has a negative connotation.
The vast majority of medical education initiatives are thoughtful, science-based efforts developed to educate the physician audience and, as such, should not be considered PR, but rather important contributions to the overall medical education effort. I believe that there is a big difference.
Carlyle Ware, Client Services Director, Complete Medical Group (CMG):
Medical education is an increasingly pivotal part of the pharmaceutical marketing and communication mix. Although a number of synergies exist between PR and med ed, traditionally med ed has been more physician facing.
A number of key elements have, therefore, differentiated the two specialties, including the need for a clear understanding of the scientific content and its impact on physicians, patients and payers, development, communication and activation of the scientific augmentation to influence physician, knowledge, attitudes, skills and behaviours and, finally, the implementation of tactical initiatives that contribute to a physician's professional development.
What are the Biggest Challenges in Med Ed ?
Marian East, Director, MedSense:
One of the main challenges in 2007 is to build on the transparent requirements when providing any medical education service. Med ed agencies are under increasing scrutiny from both regulatory bodies, clients and peer review publication channels, therefore the agencies must maintain a high level of integrity and ethical credibility by using appropriate, clear and accurate communication activities.
The challenge to recognise medical education as a speciality in its own right, and not as an add-on to advertising or PR activities, is key to maintaining a highly ethical and integral part of the communication mix.
Phil Sheldon, Managing Director, Resolute Communications:
One of the challenges facing companies is increased scepticism from some of its target audiences, so its critical to ensure that activities are truly educational in nature, with appropriate fair balance.
Increasing regulatory restrictions, including new restrictions on levels of honoraria and travel that can be provided, merely emphasise the need to deliver real value to the recipients of educational initiatives. Stretched corporate marketing budgets, and the explosion of new communications channels such as the internet, alongside a dearth of peer-reviewed journals, mean that companies are going to need to be ever more creative in their approach.
Caroline Almeida & Will Whitaker, Bristol-Myers Squibb:
The biggest challenges in 2007 for med ed are time and innovation. Healthcare professionals are a busy bunch, who have to choose between internal and external activities all competing for the same pot of time. In any one disease area, there is a host of professional groups and pharmaceutical companies vying to engage with a given healthcare professional.
To truly engage healthcare professionals in programmes, you've got to distinguish your programme by providing new information or developing a programme that takes an innovative approach to a topic.
Joanne Taylor, Director, Solaris Health:
I would say they are similar to those experienced by our clients; shrinking budgets and internal procedures for sign-off.
Also, the agency world is becoming quite a crowded marketplace and getting experienced personnel is becoming more difficult.
Will the supply of Key Opinion Leaders ever dry up?
Dan Donovan, Principal, Envision Pharma:
I don't believe there is a finite number of opinion leaders. Science changes, treatment modalities change, and young up-and-comers begin to make an impact in their fields of interest, making for a dynamic pool of opinion leaders with whom to work.
The bigger issue is that the term opinion leader is so overused that just about anyone is considered an opinion leader today, with little attention given to why they have earned such a designation. Even in the pharmaceutical industry – which understands the importance of opinion leaders in shaping thought - the definition of who an opinion leader really is, is highly variable and often misunderstood.
David Noble, International Head, BioScience Communications, Edelman Health:
Not likely. Opinion leaders want to be involved in new developments and want to generate a high profile (e.g. presenting at congresses etc).
However, it is important that the same OLs aren't doing all of the events – i.e. delegates see the same presenters at all congresses. It is about maintaining relationships with existing OLs while encouraging rising stars.
How has the new Code changed Med Ed?
Gail Flockhart, Managing Director, Caudex Medical:
These changes have helped the development of medical education projects by raising the standards and quality of such projects and bringing more focus to them in addressing the needs for which they were developed.
Changing people's opinion is no longer the only issue. Medical education companies must find innovative ways to get the message across, such as developing virtual advisory boards, on-line educational initiatives and podcasting.
Caroline Almeida, & Will Whitaker, Bristol-Myers Squibb:
The ABPI code has resulted in a more thorough approach to med ed. This complements and builds on the academic role of med ed. The new code has resulted in a longer turnaround time for materials approval. However, a good agency, which plans well in advance, will not be adversely affected by this. Getting opinion leaders on board at the outset of a programme and explaining the ABPI code approval process and timeline can facilitate a better understanding of the recent changes.
Marian East, MedSense:
There was much hand-wringing when the ABPI regulations were revised. The guidelines have provided a timely reminder about the need to demonstrate total transparency and credibility by maintaining high, professional standards when planning and implementing med ed or other activities.
The focus is now on actual med ed objectives and content and not on venues, gifts, social add-ons, which can only help improve current perceptions in the press, and medical journals on how the industry is self regulated.
Andrew Burke, Account Manager & Jan Roberts, Business Development Manager, Walter Kluwer:
The changes to the code have not particularly hindered our practice, but the revisions have produced a great deal of uncertainty for the majority of our UK pharma contacts, which has proved hard to address.
Indeed, from our perspective, some clauses still remain open to interpretation. One example of this is Clause 18, relating to the perceived value of an item.
The aim is understandable to ensure prescribers are not influenced by discounted goods – but a negative effect from our perspective has been a significant reduction in the educational material provided free to physicians through the support of pharma.
Clause 18 also stated that educational products were excluded from the £6 limit. We found there was some confusion over what exactly was considered educational. As a result of this, we feel there was a decline in the already limited UK pharma books market. The ABPI has recently addressed this query and has confirmed that books should be considered exempt from the limit.
Furthermore, as technologies develop, there will always be the need to explore and redefine the boundaries of what is acceptable practice.
An example of this is e-detailing, an increasing developing channel of information which can be received through rapidly developing media devices, and which has raised a number of concerns to be addressed, such as who receives the media (and how to include opt in/out options), how to ensure the appropriateness of content for the recipient, and how participation can be incentivised.
We appreciate that the answers to these issues may not be complicated and some may simply require asking the ABPI for advice but in most cases, there appears to be a need for a precedent to be established.
Indeed, we recognise the open approach of the ABPI and the MHRA in assisting us and the industry in interpreting the guidelines and encouraging interaction between parties in resolving unclear issues and any areas of uncertainty.
Can you measure Med Ed's Return on Investment ?
Caroline Almeida and Will Whitaker, Bristol-Myers Squibb:
The Bristol-Myers Squibb goal for med ed is to provide the highest quality education to healthcare professionals that reflects their requirements, as well as unmet medical needs. As with any effective adult learning, our aim is to evaluate whether there is a different level of understanding before and after a med ed programme.
Dan Donovan, Envision Pharma:
This is a complex question that can't be answered in a short paragraph.
The measure of success of an educational initiative depends on many different factors, and is not the same for every programme or every company. It is a far more complex measurement than, say, the number of runners that cross the plate in a baseball game. Accordingly, it needs a more sophisticated approach to show the value that the programme offers.
Joanne Taylor, Solaris Health:
Return on investment of medical education has always been a hot topic for our clients. While it is difficult to put a monetary value on the impact of medical education (as it is rarely used in isolation), we have always evaluated outcomes in terms of opinion and understanding. Ultimately, a change in behaviour will have an impact on a product's success.
Related Content
Men’s health – a new report from the Department of Health and Social Care
The UK Department of Health and Social Care has published a new report entitled Men’s …
Educating pharma
Originally published in the October issue of Pharmafocus, Sean Murray takes a look at how pharma …
Wave Healthcare Communications – Four predictions for med ed in 2016
These are some of the trends Wave foresees in the forthcoming year: Integration We predict …
