Tame Physicians’ Digital Fatigue With Brand Message Overdose

“The COVID-19 pandemic forced pharmaceutical companies adopt digital-first marketing models when in-person strategies were inaccessible, but health care practitioners report they’re becoming increasingly inundated with information and the shift to virtual marketing isn’t meeting their needs.” This was the finding of a new research of Indegene, published on March 02, 2022. The survey covers around 1,000 physicians from the U.S., Europe, China, and India.

Currently, many HCPs construe that pharma’s increasing frequency of digital outreach – involving several digital channels and various touch points, primarily to push product-related promotional information, is excessive. Continuity of such feelings could be counterproductive to the desired intent of drug companies.

Therefore, the point that surfaces: Is the digital marketing drive of many pharma marketers, even when the Covid pandemic is in a waning phase, ‘overwhelming’ some Key Opinion Leaders (KOL)? More important is to fathom, how to address it? Today’s article will focus on this emerging issue. Let me begin with a few other key findings of this paper.

Some other key findings of the survey:

Some of the major findings of the above survey include:

  • Digital marketing channels for HCPs most commonly include webinars, social media outreach, emails and text messaging from reps and self-directed web and remote detailing.
  • While HCPs are becoming more familiar with digital technologies, 62% of them feel ‘overwhelmed’ by product-related promotional content they receive from pharma companies through various virtual channels.
  • 70% feel that drug companies are out of touch with their information needs and expectations from new drugs, besides other products and services.
  • 63% HCPs expect pharma companies to share only relevant content with them – over channels of their preferences, and at a time of their convenience, to make the interactions more insightful.

At this point, let us also have a glance at the findings of other recent surveys, as well, in this space.

Other surveys also point in the same direction:

Yes, other surveys also vindicate this point. For example,

A. Just prior to the above study, on December 07, 2021, Accenture published the findings of their own study in this regard, which includes the following:

  • 65% of HCPs feel that several pharma companies have “spammed” them with digital content as the COVID-19 pandemic went through several waves.
  • The firms need to do more to better understand and meet HCP expectations (56%) and their patients (60%) due to COVID-19.
  • When pharma companies do more, 80% of HCPs would be twice as likely to meet the pharma reps with more time and attention.
  • Almost half of the HCPs surveyed (46%) prefer a mix of in-person and virtual meetings focused on the needs of their patients, as the COVID-19 pandemic ends.

B. Another study on this subject was published in PLOS ONE, on April 16, 2021. This study focused on pharma Webinars. As many will be aware, Webinars comprised a major avenue for customer engagement during COVID-19 – creating initial general satisfaction among physicians.

This, in turn, led to an increase in webinar usage in 2020 compared to the same period in 2019, with more than 300% in one study and up to 3250% in another. Which is why, despite the initial satisfaction – over a period, most physicians ‘felt overwhelmed with the number and frequency of webinars.’

Hence, customer satisfaction being crucial in any engagement process, Webinars may now be used with a purpose to complement traditional in-person methods, rather than replacement, study concluded.

What exactly doctors want to know in the new normal?

Against the above new backdrop – the issue is, how can pharma marketers engage the HCPs without overwhelming them, mostly with continuous, too frequent and wave after wave digital contents. This point was addressed in a Fierce Pharma article, published on February 16, 2022. It quoted some doctors saying, such as:

  • “If I’m a [high prescriber], great, remind me about efficacy.”
  • “But I also want to know who’s the right patient for this drug.”
  • “I want to know what access is like.”
  • “What types of patient savings programs are available?”
  • How can I support my patient, so they stay on the drug—because I believe in it.”
  • “If I’m a non-writer, I want to know how the mechanism of action is different?” “How does this drug show up in the guidelines?”
  • “Is there head-to-head data versus another drug?”

Reps digital training demands a fresh focus:

Educating or updating doctors through Continuing Medical Education (CME) programs is an ongoing process for drugmakers. It remained so with remote digital channels during the pandemic, as well. Whereas, selecting digitally savvy reps, training and helping them to be “flexible and efficient” in using digital channels and content, based on HCP preferences – demands a fresh focus.

As some of the above studies also emphasized that significantly reducing the number of reps because of wider use of remote digital platforms, may not be advisable at this juncture. This is despite some companies are now doing it – both globally and locally. For example, on January 12, 2022, Reuters reported: ‘Pfizer to cut U.S. sales staff, as meetings with healthcare providers move to virtual.’

On the contrary, I reckon, most reps will need fresh training to ‘go beyond the product script, particularly if a given doctor has seen plenty of digital product info already.’ The same paper further suggests: “Reps should focus on conversations that make the interactions insightful – and avoid driving product information fatigue.” 

Conclusion:

With the intensity of Covid-19 pandemic subsiding, many HCPs feel that they’re getting too much digital content from pharma companies. While they aren’t totally averse to digital communication, several of them expressed by being increasingly “spammed” as the time progressed.

For making pharma companies’ engagement with their customers in the changing times, this issue needs to be effectively addressed, soon. The companies will need to select and deploy marketers with a deeper understanding of what HCPs are looking for, to make new digitally focused marketing more meaningful to them – fetching greater business return.

Some studies also signaled that significantly reducing the number of reps – as less staff is required for digital engagement with doctors, may not be prudent at this stage. Instead, the companies need to upskill their digitally savvy reps ‘to integrate remote and digital touchpoints successfully with their in-person touchpoints.’

All these new initiatives when taken in tandem and well-integrated manner, will help meet doctors’ engagement preferences. In that process, pharma players will succeed in taming physicians’ digital fatigue with product-communication overdose, especially, in today’s time – making their marketing efforts more productive and meaningful to HCPs.

By: Tapan J. Ray    

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

 

 

Union Budget 2018: The ‘WOW’ Moment for Indian Healthcare?

The 2018-19 Union Budget proposals, presented before the Parliament on February 01, 2018. Especially for those who take keen interest in the Indian healthcare environment, was there a ‘WOW’ moment in the budget? Some say, this long-awaited moment came with the Union Finance Minister’s (FM) announcement of the ‘Ayushman Bharat Program (ABP)’ – the “world’s largest healthcare program,” taking a major step towards the Universal Health Coverage (UHC) for all, in India.

Two other health care related major announcements made by the FM in his 2018 Union Budget proposal are:

  • 24 new government medical colleges by upgrading existing district hospitals.  This is to bridge the gap between doctor-patient ratio in the country.
  • An allocation of ₹60 million for nutritional support to all tuberculosis patients – ₹ 500 per month per patient for 10 months, during the duration of their treatment.

The ‘Ayushman Bharat Program (ABP)’:

In this article, I shall not touch upon what expectations of pharma and healthcare industries were not met with the budget, as that will no more than an academic deliberation, at this stage. I shall rather restrict my discussion to ABP, for obvious reasons. This potential game changer, covers two commendable initiatives, as follows:

1. The New Health Protection Scheme (HPS) offering health insurance coverage of ₹500,000 per family per annum, is expected to take under its wings 100 million vulnerable families, or around 500 million beneficiaries. The total budgetary allocation for this mega proposal, for which the detail contours, apparently, are yet to be fleshed out and made public.

Some Senior Government officials, though, have put across its sketchy outline during post-budget Television coverage, on last Thursday. However, many industry watchers construe HPS as an expanded version, with a different name, of the current ‘Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY)’, which provides annual coverage of just ₹30,000 for poor families.

A fund of just ₹20 billion has been earmarked for this mega project in the Union Budget 2018-19.

2. Creation of 150,000 health and wellness centers to provide ‘comprehensive health care’ – for prevention and treatment of both communicable and non-communicable diseases (NCDS), including maternal/child health services, and free essential drugs alongside diagnostic services. This will “bring healthcare closer to home”, as the FM articulated.

A sum of ₹1.2 billion (₹1200 crore) had been allocated for this project in the 2018 budget proposal. The FM also requested contributions from the private sectors through CSR, besides philanthropic entities, in adopting these centers.

The points to ponder before saying ‘WOW!’

So far so good. However, as the saying goes, the devil is in the detail. From that angle, sans any meaningful details, does it look merely as an expression of the Government’ intent? Or it is for real! This serious doubt emanates from some key considerations. Three of which, as I reckon, are as follows:

I. Is it the beginning of implementation of the much-awaited National Health Policy 2017 (NHP), where the Government had committed and expenditure for UHC around 2.5 percent of the India’s GDP? This number currently hovers around 1.4 percent –  reportedly, less than even Nepal (2.3 percent) and Sri Lanka (2 percent). There is no mention of this in the Union Budget Proposal 2018, either, how much it will now go up to. By the way, the same report, as above, of January 2018 also indicated that health costs push 39 million Indians back into poverty, every year.

  • Attaining the NHP 2017 objectives, prompts a rise of around 40 percent in the public health expenditure of the Government. Whereas, the allocated reported expenditure for health in 2018-19 at ₹52.8 billion over the revised estimate of ₹50.1 billion in 2017/18. This works out to an increase of just around 5.4 percent.
  • The allocated expenditure of ₹20 billion for ABP in 2018-19, over the last year’s (2017-18) very similar health budget for ‘National Health Mission (NRM)’, reportedly, of ₹26.70 billion, looks rather pale. The financial arithmetic doesn’t appear to add up, defying simple logic. Is the allocation enough to support the ABP for 2018-19, even if the ABP funding is shared in the ratio of 60:40 between the Central and the State Governments?
  • Diving slightly deeper, on February 02, 2018, quoting a Government official Reuters reported, the cost of providing health insurance to 100 million vulnerable families or close to about half the country’s population would require an estimated ₹110 billion (USD$ 1.72 billion) in central and state funding each year.
  • The government estimates the cost of insuring each family would be about ₹1,100 rupees (US$17.15), the above report says. Curiously, on the face of it, this huge amount appears as an ‘off balance sheet’ expenditure, as of now.
  • Intriguingly, when the ABP is still not in place, there has been, reportedly, a 2.1 percent decline in the allocation towards the NRM in 2018-19. Currently, NHM provides financial support to States to strengthen the public health system, including upgradation of existing or construction of new infrastructure. In addition, there is a 7 percent cut in the allocation for the ‘Swachh Bharat Mission’ Budget from 2017-18’s revised estimates.

II. The second question is equally critical. Just as the erstwhile State Sales Tax (now a part of GST), healthcare is also a state subject. Thus, a similar process of intensive consultation with all State Governments, as happened before the implementation of GST, to take them on board, has to be replicated for a consensus. This will include a commitment for 60:40 funding, alongside the mechanisms for effective implementation of ABP – step by step. Has that happened? Have all the States agreed to contribute 40 percent of total funding requirements in their respective states for ABP?

  • If the answer is yes – excellent! If not, when will the ABP be rolled out? Different senior government officials have indicated different dates on Television. Some said on the Independence Day this year – August 15, 2018. Some other official said on October 02, 2018 – Gandhi Jayanti of this year. Yet another responsible official said the actual implementation may, actually, take even more time. This could mean only one thing, the ABP has been announced without any fixed timeframe for its implementation.

III. The third question lies in the effectiveness of insurance-driven health care system, such as in the United States. The key question often is raised on this system: Do the health insurance companies derive more benefit out of this system rather than the patients?

  • Concurring with the experts of many other countries, India’s own – Dr. (Professor) K. Srinath Reddy, globally acclaimed cardiologist and the President, Public Health Foundation of India, reportedly is also of the opinion that “Government-funded social insurance schemes do increase access to advanced care. But they have not been shown to provide financial protection as they cover only part of the hospitalization cost and none of the expense of prolonged outpatient care which forms a higher percentage of out-of-pocket spending.”
  • Insurance-driven healthcare has been found wanting to properly balancing health insurance costs with access, quality of care and outcomes in several countries. The experience of most of those people in India who can avail the benefits of insurance-driven – the Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY) or Employee State Insurance Schemes (ESIS), are not very pleasant, either.
  • On the other hand, despite some peripheral issues, many prefer, the government run UHC, such as in Britain. These generally offer a broader health coverage to all, and most health and care related services are available free to the citizens. The UHC is fully funded by taxes there, though a private health care system exists along with it. Thus, serious apprehensions related to the depth of health care access, reach in the rural heartland, and the quality of product and services to be generally provided by the insurance-driven new HPS, continue to haunt.

Conclusion:

Considering all these aspects, renamed HPS, as it was announced by the FM on February 01, 2018, and subsequent incongruent and very tentative clarifications expressed through the media by some Senior Government officials, raises even more questions than answers.

Sans any transparent and well-laid out financial road map, detail mechanism of its operation, level of involvement and consensus reached with all the States on funding and implementation, specific timeframe for its rollout, besides addressing almost a collapsing public health-infrastructure framework in most States, the Government appears rather unprepared with HCP rollout in 2018.

Does this announcement for HCP, therefore, not reflect a bit of haste, if not an intent to achieve any other non-related objective? Thus, this edict didn’t fetch a WOW moment to me, at least for this year, or…did it?

By: Tapan J. Ray 

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.