21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      A Decade of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs

      , ,
      New England Journal of Medicine
      Massachusetts Medical Society

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Evidence suggests that direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs increases pharmaceutical sales and both helps to avert underuse of medicines and leads to potential overuse. Concern about such advertising has increased recently owing to the withdrawal from the market of heavily advertised drugs found to carry serious risks. Moreover, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been criticized for its weak enforcement of laws regulating such advertising. We examined industry-wide trends in spending by pharmaceutical companies on direct-to-consumer advertising and promotion to physicians during the past decade. We characterized the drugs for which such advertising is used and assessed the timing of advertising after a drug is introduced. Finally, we examined trends in the FDA's regulation of drug advertising. Total spending on pharmaceutical promotion grew from $11.4 billion in 1996 to $29.9 billion in 2005. Although during that time spending on direct-to-consumer advertising increased by 330%, it made up only 14% of total promotional expenditures in 2005. Direct-to-consumer campaigns generally begin within a year after the approval of a product by the FDA. In the context of regulatory changes requiring legal review before issuing letters, the number of letters sent by the FDA to pharmaceutical manufacturers regarding violations of drug-advertising regulations fell from 142 in 1997 to only 21 in 2006. Spending on direct-to-consumer advertising has continued to increase in recent years in spite of the criticisms leveled against it. Our findings suggest that calls for a moratorium on such advertising for new drugs would represent a dramatic departure from current practices. Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Influence of patients' requests for direct-to-consumer advertised antidepressants: a randomized controlled trial.

          Direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising of prescription drugs in the United States is both ubiquitous and controversial. Critics charge that it leads to overprescribing, while proponents counter that it helps avert underuse of effective treatments, especially for conditions that are poorly recognized or stigmatized. To ascertain the effects of patients' DTC-related requests on physicians' initial treatment decisions in patients with depressive symptoms. Randomized trial using standardized patients (SPs). Six SP roles were created by crossing 2 conditions (major depression or adjustment disorder with depressed mood) with 3 request types (brand-specific, general, or none). Offices of primary care physicians in Sacramento, Calif; San Francisco, Calif; and Rochester, NY, between May 2003 and May 2004. One hundred fifty-two family physicians and general internists recruited from solo and group practices and health maintenance organizations; cooperation rates ranged from 53% to 61%. The SPs were randomly assigned to make 298 unannounced visits, with assignments constrained so physicians saw 1 SP with major depression and 1 with adjustment disorder. The SPs made a brand-specific drug request, a general drug request, or no request (control condition) in approximately one third of visits. Data on prescribing, mental health referral, and primary care follow-up obtained from SP written reports, visit audiorecordings, chart review, and analysis of written prescriptions and drug samples. The effects of request type on prescribing were evaluated using contingency tables and confirmed in generalized linear mixed models that accounted for clustering and adjusted for site, physician, and visit characteristics. Standardized patient role fidelity was excellent, and the suspicion rate that physicians had seen an SP was 13%. In major depression, rates of antidepressant prescribing were 53%, 76%, and 31% for SPs making brand-specific, general, and no requests, respectively (P<.001). In adjustment disorder, antidepressant prescribing rates were 55%, 39%, and 10%, respectively (P<.001). The results were confirmed in multivariate models. Minimally acceptable initial care (any combination of an antidepressant, mental health referral, or follow-up within 2 weeks) was offered to 98% of SPs in the major depression role making a general request, 90% of those making a brand-specific request, and 56% of those making no request (P<.001). Patients' requests have a profound effect on physician prescribing in major depression and adjustment disorder. Direct-to-consumer advertising may have competing effects on quality, potentially both averting underuse and promoting overuse.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Promotion of prescription drugs to consumers.

            Spending on prescription drugs is the fastest growing component of the health care budget. There is public concern about the possibility that direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs will result in inappropriate prescribing and higher costs of care. Guidelines issued in 1997 by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding advertising to consumers through electronic media are considered by some to be responsible for unleashing a flood of direct-to-consumer advertising. Using data on spending for promotional purposes and sales of prescription drugs, we examined industrywide trends for various types of promotion. We also tracked the relation between promotional efforts and sales over time. Finally, we documented the variation in direct-to-consumer advertising among and within five therapeutic classes of drugs and compared the variation in the intensity of such advertising with variation in the intensity of promotion to health care professionals. Annual spending on direct-to-consumer advertising for prescription drugs tripled between 1996 and 2000, when it reached nearly $2.5 billion. Despite this increase, such advertising accounts for only 15 percent of the money spent on drug promotion and is highly concentrated on a subgroup of products. Within a therapeutic class, there is marked variation in the intensity of direct-to-consumer advertising, and the amount of such advertising for specific products fluctuates over time. The initial surge in direct-to-consumer advertising preceded the 1997 FDA guidelines that clarified the rules for electronic direct-to-consumer advertising, and thus the 1997 guidelines may not have been the most important reason for the overall increase. Although the use of direct-to-consumer advertising has grown disproportionately to other forms of promotion, it continues to account for a small proportion of total promotional efforts. Nevertheless, physicians must assist patients in evaluating health-related information obtained through direct advertising.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Promotion of Prescription Drugs and Its Impact on Physicians’ Choice Behavior

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                New England Journal of Medicine
                N Engl J Med
                Massachusetts Medical Society
                0028-4793
                1533-4406
                August 16 2007
                August 16 2007
                : 357
                : 7
                : 673-681
                Article
                10.1056/NEJMsa070502
                17699817
                ca7efe46-dc64-4b4d-99ef-5645d687d23f
                © 2007
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article