Healthy Skepticism Library item: 3154

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: Journal Article

Osifo NG.
Overpromotion of drugs in international product package inserts.
Trop Doct 1983 Jan; 13:(1):5-8

Abstract:

The information in the product package inserts (PPIs) in 28 drugs in Nigeria was compared to the information in the United States Physicians’ Desk Reference (PDR). The findings indicate that most multinational companies, especially through their affiliates and subsidiaries, overpromote their drugs for extra indications and with mention of fewer hazards in the PPIs, than in the PDR. For some drugs with known, medically-stringent indications or low therapeutics indices, a few drug companies appeared to exert discretional restraint on overpromotion by providing the same content of information in the PPIs as in the PDR. The present study suggests that merely intending a better drug control with more sophisticated regulations which are not enforced may not cure the exploitative attitude of multinational drug companies and their subsidiaries or affiliates, in overpromoting pharmaceutical products through PPIs destined for countries with a literally free drug market.

A study of the drug-labelling information contained in international product package inserts (PPIs) available in Nigeria in comparison with similar information in the United States Physicians’ Desk Reference (PDR) was undertaken, against a background of recently-improved drug control regulations in Nigeria. The findings indicate that most multinational pharmaceutical firms, especially through their affiliates and subsidiaries, overpromote their drugs for extra indications and with mention of fewer hazards in the PPIs, than in the PDR. For some drugs with known, medically-stringent indications or low therapeutic indices, a few drug companies appeared to exert discretional restraint on overpromotion by providing the same content of information in the PPIs as in the PDR. The present study suggests that merely intending a better drug control with more sophisticated regulations which are not enforced may not cure the exploitative attitude of multinational drug companies and their subsidiaries or affiliates, in overpromoting pharmaceutical products through PPIs destined for countries with a literally free drug market.

Keywords:
*analytic survey/Nigeria/developing countries/Physicians’ Desk Reference/ PDR/ package inserts/EVALUATION OF PROMOTION: COMPARISON BETWEEN DEVELOPING AND DEVELOPED COUNTRIES/EVALUATION OF PROMOTION: LABELLING AND PACKAGE INSERTS/PROMOTION AND HEALTH NEEDS: PROMOTION IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES/PROMOTIONAL TECHNIQUES: PACKAGE INSERTS Developing Countries Drug Industry/economics* Drug Labeling* Nigeria