Lilly censured for rep photo
pharmafile | October 25, 2012 | News story | Medical Communications, Sales and Marketing | ABPI, GP, PMCPA, lilly
Lilly has breached the ABPI’s Code of Practice because one of its representatives insisted on taking pictures of doctors underneath a poster as part of a sales incentive scheme.
The case came to the PMCPA’s attention after a GP complained about the ‘unprofessional and unacceptable’ unnamed Lilly rep.
Taking pictures was part of a so-called ‘Wall of Pain Hall of Fame Competition’, for which reps could earn themselves cinema vouchers and cocktails depending on how many people at various surgeries they got to pose with the poster.
This was all done under instruction, in a briefing document, from the rep’s manager and there was even a prize for the most amusing photo.
Linked to Lilly’s diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) foot symptom assessment tool, the poster was designed to raise awareness about symptoms and was the sort of material that might commonly be displayed in surgery waiting rooms.
The GP and a nurse refused to be photographed, at which the rep ‘became quite shirty and insistent’. In all, three staff members had their pictures taken, saying they were unhappy but did not want to make a fuss.
Lilly was not given enough information to identify the rep, which meant complaints about how he or she had described the competition and their behaviour could not be answered.
However, the PMCPA panel expressed concern that the ‘Wall of Pain Hall of Fame’ name trivialised a painful complication of diabetes and that there was no professional element to the competition.
The sales manager and team had not maintained a high standard of ethical conduct, thus breaching clause 15.2.
High standards had also not been maintained at all times (clause 9.1) and the panel said Lilly had also contravened clause 15.9, which states that briefing material must not advocate any course of action likely to lead to a breach of the Code.
The panel also thought that taking such photos, and being rewarded with cinema vouchers and cocktails, demeaned the health professionals and the rep and therefore Lilly had fallen foul of clause 2.
This is the most serious breach of the Code, and means that a company’s actions have reduced confidence in, or brought discredit to, the pharma industry as a whole.
Lilly appealed this, however, and the PMCPA appeal board overturned the clause 2 breach ruling for several reasons:
- the sales manager had independently devised the competition so that patients might be better informed about DPNP and report symptoms – something the board said would be helpful to diabetics
- the competition was initiated without Lilly’s knowledge or approval in a limited geographical area
- Lilly stopped it on receipt of the GP’s complaint and no prizes had been awarded
- the company did not condone the behaviour of the sales manager and accepted the PMCPA’s breach rulings.
Notwithstanding, the appeal board made clear again that the sales manager had displayed ‘very poor judgement’ and the competition as a whole was ‘distasteful’.
Adam Hill
Related Content
The Pharma Files: With Professor Hatim Abdulhussein from Health Innovation Kent Surrey Sussex
Pharmafile chats with Priyanka Hinton, Customer Solutions Director at Chase People about the best parts …
NICE RECOMMENDS LILLY’S TIRZEPATIDE (MOUNJARO ®▼) FOR MANAGING OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY IN FINAL DRAFT GUIDANCE
BASINGSTOKE, 5th December 2024 – Eli Lilly and Company announced today that the National Institute …
Pharmacists in England given wider prescribing powers to relieve GP pressure
NHS England had announced that pharmacists in England will be given wider prescribing powers to …
