Traductor

13 January 2013

The corporate reputation of pharma in 2012—the patient perspective

  • A global survey, conducted mid-November to mid-December 2012, exploring the views of 600 international, national, and regional patient groups from 56 countries (72% from Europe) and differing specialties.
  • Patient group feedback on the corporate reputation of the pharma industry during 2012.
  • Patient group feedback provides rankings of 29 leading pharma companies for six key indicators that influence corporate reputation: patient-centredness; patient information; patient safety; useful products; transparency; and integrity.
  • Results for 2012 are compared with those of 2011.
About this study
This independent study, funded by PatientView, represents 600 patient groups’ latest impressions on the corporate reputation of 29 individual pharma companies and of the pharma industry as a whole.
For the purposes of this report, the phrase ‘corporate reputation’ is defined as the extent to which pharma companies are meeting the expectations of patients and patient groups.
The 29 companies examined:
*Abbott *Allergan *Amgen *AstraZeneca *Baxter International *Bayer * Biogen Idec *Boehringer Ingelheim *Bristol-Myers Squibb *Celgene *Eli Lilly (Lilly) *Gilead Sciences *GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) *Janssen *Lundbeck * Menarini *Merck & Co (the US company) *Merck Group (the German company) *Novartis *Novo Nordisk *Pfizer *Roche *Sanofi *Servier  *Shire *Stada Arzneimittel *Takeda *Teva *UCB
Key findings industry-wide: reputation of pharma fell in 2012
The overall reputation of pharma declined in 2012. Only 34% of the 600 patient groups responding to the 2012 survey state that multinational pharma companies had an “Excellent” or “Good” reputation during 2012. The equivalent figure from the 500 patient groups responding to the 2011 survey was 42%. 40% of the 600 respondent patient groups state that the reputation of the pharma industry had declined during 2012.
As many as 50% of the 600 respondent patient groups say that industry had a “Poor” record in 2012 for having fair pricing policies.
48% of the 600 respondent patient groups say that industry had a “Poor” record in 2012 for being transparent.
When the 2012 results are compared with those of 2011, the sharpest falls in pharma performance are for the following:
  • Managing adverse news about product—a 29% fall between 2011 and 2012.
  • Having ethical marketing practices—a 23% fall between 2011 and 2012.
  • Having a good relationship with the media—a 19% fall, 2011-2012.
Top pharma performers for 2012
Lundbeck takes 1st place overall
Patient groups commenting on the corporate reputation of pharma in 2012 are highly sensitive to 'bad corporate stories'. Many of the 600 patient groups responding to this 2012 survey refer to negative press during the year to explain why they have downgraded their opinion of some companies—particularly on issues of patient safety, transparency and company integrity. Pharma companies with a high exposure to ‘bad stories’ in 2012 see their rankings drop. Other, less-affected, pharma companies benefit as a result.
Rankings for each of the six indicators
The table above shows the top rankings for each of the six indicators. Company performance can vary significantly, according to the strengths and weaknesses of the company (as seen from a patient perspective).
Several reasons explain why pharma’s reputation fell during 2012
Respondent patient groups reporta continuing failure to help patients in cash-strapped southern-European countries (such as Greece, Portugal, Romania, and Spain) gain access to medicines  *  a preoccupation by pharma with drugs that offer only short-term health benefits;   not enough effort being made to discover chemical entities suitable for neglected catchments of patients;  *  inappropriate marketing of drugs (including those for off-label indications);   perceived lack of transparency—especially in reporting the disappointing results of clinical trials;  *  drugs prices that, in some cases, are still unaffordable to many patients or their payers—culminating in a general impression that profit comes before making people well.
For further information: http://patientview.posterous.com/

No comments:

Post a Comment

CONTACTO · Aviso Legal · Política de Privacidad · Política de Cookies

Copyright © Noticia de Salud