corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 17788

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Electronic Source

Silverman E
DTC Ads Not Biggest Driver Of Drug Spending: Study
Pharmalot 2010 May 17
http://www.pharmalot.com/2010/05/dtc-ads-not-biggest-driver-of-drug-spending-study/


Full text:

If you enjoy discussions of price elasticity, do we have a paper for you. Economic simulations suggest that the expansion in broadcast DTC ads may have been responsible for 19 percent of the overall growth in prescription drug spending from 1994 to 2005, with over two-thirds driven by increased demand due to expanded advertising and the remainder due to higher prices. All this is according to a new paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (purchase required).
But while DTC advertising was deemed significant, the authors conclude “it has not been the primary force driving the growth in overall prescription drug expenditures.” [UPDATE: Curiously, the conclusion seems to contradict the bottom-line findings.] The study examined the separate effects of broadcast and non-broadcast DTC ads on price and demand, using an “extended time series of monthly records” for all advertised and non-advertised drugs in four major therapeutic classes – painkillers, cholesterol, heartburn and insomnia – spanning 1994 to 2005. This period encompassed notable shifts in FDA guidelines and expanded DTC advertising.
Those classes were chosen since they include one or more drugs with relatively high DTC spending and others with little or no DTC, according to the paper. The four therapeutic classes had combined sales of $48.9 billion in 2005, or 24 percent of total drug spending for US DTC advertising. DTC ads in these classes amounted to $1.04 billion in 2005, about 25 percent of total DTC ads run for all drugs.
The data show that 69 percent of cholesterol fighters have been advertised to consumers. In comparison, about 50 percent of the insomnia drugs have been advertised, 39 percent of gastrointestinal drugs have been advertised, and only about 23 percent of antiarthritic meds have been advertised over the sample period.
Among drugs which were advertised to consumers, the average monthly advertising is $1.61 million, 59 percent of which is broadcast DTC with the remainder spent on non-broadcast media. Total expenditures on advertised drugs are significantly higher relative to non-advertised drugs.
The authors note that the “lingering effect” of DTC ads may be more prolonged than in consumer goods because of the lag time between advertising exposure, scheduling a physician visit, and filling a prescription. And physican promotion, such as sampling, tends to be “significantly higher” for advertised drugs compared with drugs that are not advertised.
The paper was written by Dhaval Dave, an economics professor at Bentley University, and Henry Saffer, an economics adjunct professor at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








...to influence multinational corporations effectively, the efforts of governments will have to be complemented by others, notably the many voluntary organisations that have shown they can effectively represent society’s public-health interests…
A small group known as Healthy Skepticism; formerly the Medical Lobby for Appropriate Marketing) has consistently and insistently drawn the attention of producers to promotional malpractice, calling for (and often securing) correction. These organisations [Healthy Skepticism, Médecins Sans Frontières and Health Action International] are small, but they are capable; they bear malice towards no one, and they are inscrutably honest. If industry is indeed persuaded to face up to its social responsibilities in the coming years it may well be because of these associations and others like them.
- Dukes MN. Accountability of the pharmaceutical industry. Lancet. 2002 Nov 23; 360(9346)1682-4.