Annals of Oncology Advance Access originally published online on December 12, 2006
Annals of Oncology 2007 18(3):607; doi:10.1093/annonc/mdl422
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2006 European Society for Medical Oncology
letters to the editor |
Are sales representatives and the sale strategies of pharmaceutical companies getting too aggressive towards physicians?
In the last few years a number of drugs have been launched into the oncological market by pharmaceutical companies, including new biological drugs and drugs that can be used as a support for patients undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy. As a matter of fact, pharmaceutical companies are merging, and, through the merging process, the portfolio of the new companies changes and sales representatives are rearranged throughout the new companies. Some of the sales representatives are now afraid of losing their job, due to the changing scenario and the possible lay offs. On the other hand, the new, bigger, pharmaceutical companies are competing more and more with one another, and, in order to stress their products, might adopt a more aggressive sales strategy. For example, sometimes in the same geographical area there are five representatives for just one company, or different representatives for the same drug in different settings. As a result of the new, aggressive strategy, the aggressiveness of representatives has also been increasing, since the larger stress exerted by their companies might affect their stay in the company. Therefore, they tend to have more frequent visits to encourage physicians to prescribe drugs and thus increase sales [1, 2].At our small oncology unit, located in the northeast of Italy, we have counted almost 40 sales representatives interacting with us, and most of them are coming for a visit on a regular once-a-month basis, in order to stress the usefulness of their products and push clinicians towards the use of their drugs. This means that, basically, there are at least two representatives every day in our busy clinic asking for a ‘short’ meeting to support their product. We have observed that sometimes there are up to five or six representatives in a day. Although sales representatives' visits are important for an update on drugs and their use, we think that, in a busy clinic like ours and many others, too frequent visits, without a real need, might be time consuming and useless for both sides. The physicians are, in general, sneaking away, trying to hide from sales representatives, since there are too many and they are too pushy and there is too little time, and the representatives probably have noticed that the reluctant physicians have always less time for short meetings and less interest and tend to reduce the time of the visit [3]. This was not the same in the past in Italy, where the relationship between clinicians and representatives has always been good and pharmaceutical companies have provided, and still provide, the major economical support for physicians' continuous medical education. Something needs to be done to find a solution to this problem that takes into account the needs of both pharmaceutical companies and their representatives on one side and physicians on the other, for a better professional interaction.
U.O. Oncologia Medica, Ospedale Civile, Vittorio Veneto (TV), Italy
* E-mail: daniele.bernardi{at}ulss7.it
References
1. Parker RS and Pettijohn CE. (2005) Pharmaceutical drug marketing strategies and tactics: a comparative analysis of attitudes held by pharmaceutical representatives and physicians. Health Mark Q 22:27–43.[Medline]
2. Granja M. (2005) Dangerous liaisons—physicians and pharmaceutical sales representatives. Acta Med Port 18:61–68.[Medline]
3. Brody H. (2005) The company we keep: why physicians should refuse to see pharmaceutical representatives. Ann Fam Med 3:82–85.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C Wick, M Egger, S Trelle, P Juni, and M. Fey The characteristics of unsolicited clinical oncology literature provided by pharmaceutical industry Ann. Onc., September 1, 2007; 18(9): 1580 - 1582. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||