A quantitative insight of the interactions of prescribers with pharmaceutical organization’s representatives in clinical settings of Karachi

IF 2.1 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Sadia Shakeel, Shagufta Nesar, Wajiha Iffat, B. Fatima, Tahmina Maqbool, S. Jamshed
{"title":"A quantitative insight of the interactions of prescribers with pharmaceutical organization’s representatives in clinical settings of Karachi","authors":"Sadia Shakeel, Shagufta Nesar, Wajiha Iffat, B. Fatima, Tahmina Maqbool, S. Jamshed","doi":"10.2147/IPRP.S196318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: The study was conducted with the aim to evaluate the prescribers’ approach of interaction with medical representatives for drug promotion. Methods: An explanatory, cross-sectional design was used to evaluate prescribers’ interactions with the medical sales representatives (MSRs) through an anonymous, self-filled questionnaire from June to December 2017. Data presented as means±SEM or as percentages and statistically analyzed by one way ANOVA, using significance level of 0.05. Results: A response rate of 82.8% was achieved. More than 70% agreed that knowledge obtained from MSRs is reliable and useful. A large proportion of respondents acknowledged that MSRs are a key link between pharmaceutical companies and health care professionals, and their interactions are beneficial as MSRs perform an important teaching function. More than 45% agreed that gifts are influential; however, physicians cannot be compromised with very expensive gifts. The majority of the respondents (76%) considered that promotional items are ethically appropriate; however, 66.21% thought that promotional items influence the practice of prescribing. More than half (52.18%) deemed a promotional material more reliable than a printed advertisement. More than 80% of the respondents opined that medication samples are considered appropriate; however, they should only be given to those patients who cannot financially afford them. Around 69% thought that company-sponsored meetings promote their own drugs under the disguise of CME programs. Conclusion: The present study emphasizes the importance of employing scientifically sound prescribing decision by prescribers in their day to day practice without being influenced by pharmaceutical company’s promotional activities. There is a need for restricting unprincipled practices by the concerned regulatory authorities to evade preventable harm to the patient’s well-being.","PeriodicalId":45655,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IPRP.S196318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objectives: The study was conducted with the aim to evaluate the prescribers’ approach of interaction with medical representatives for drug promotion. Methods: An explanatory, cross-sectional design was used to evaluate prescribers’ interactions with the medical sales representatives (MSRs) through an anonymous, self-filled questionnaire from June to December 2017. Data presented as means±SEM or as percentages and statistically analyzed by one way ANOVA, using significance level of 0.05. Results: A response rate of 82.8% was achieved. More than 70% agreed that knowledge obtained from MSRs is reliable and useful. A large proportion of respondents acknowledged that MSRs are a key link between pharmaceutical companies and health care professionals, and their interactions are beneficial as MSRs perform an important teaching function. More than 45% agreed that gifts are influential; however, physicians cannot be compromised with very expensive gifts. The majority of the respondents (76%) considered that promotional items are ethically appropriate; however, 66.21% thought that promotional items influence the practice of prescribing. More than half (52.18%) deemed a promotional material more reliable than a printed advertisement. More than 80% of the respondents opined that medication samples are considered appropriate; however, they should only be given to those patients who cannot financially afford them. Around 69% thought that company-sponsored meetings promote their own drugs under the disguise of CME programs. Conclusion: The present study emphasizes the importance of employing scientifically sound prescribing decision by prescribers in their day to day practice without being influenced by pharmaceutical company’s promotional activities. There is a need for restricting unprincipled practices by the concerned regulatory authorities to evade preventable harm to the patient’s well-being.
定量洞察处方者的相互作用与制药组织的代表在卡拉奇的临床设置
目的:探讨处方方在药品推广过程中与医学代表互动的方式。方法:采用解释性横断面设计,通过2017年6月至12月的匿名自填问卷,评估处方医师与医疗销售代表(msr)的互动情况。数据以均数±SEM或百分比表示,采用单因素方差分析进行统计分析,显著性水平为0.05。结果:总有效率为82.8%。超过70%的人认为从MSRs获得的知识是可靠和有用的。很大比例的答复者承认,msr是制药公司与卫生保健专业人员之间的关键联系,它们之间的互动是有益的,因为msr发挥着重要的教学功能。超过45%的人认为礼物有影响力;然而,医生不能接受非常昂贵的礼物。大多数受访者(76%)认为促销物品在道德上是合适的;然而,66.21%的人认为促销项目影响了处方的实践。超过一半(52.18%)的人认为宣传材料比印刷广告更可靠。超过80%的受访者认为药物样本是适当的;然而,它们应该只给那些经济上负担不起的病人。大约69%的人认为公司赞助的会议是在CME项目的幌子下推销自己的药物。结论:本研究强调了医生在日常实践中采用科学合理的处方决策的重要性,而不受制药公司促销活动的影响。有必要限制有关监管当局的无原则做法,以避免对患者健康造成可预防的伤害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
3.40%
发文量
29
审稿时长
16 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信