Authors :
Maduabuchukwu Augustine Onwuzurike; Augustine Rita Chikodi
Volume/Issue :
Volume 9 - 2024, Issue 6 - June
Google Scholar :
https://tinyurl.com/yw9yxdra
Scribd :
https://tinyurl.com/2s4z6kt8
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24JUN876
Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.
Abstract :
The pharmaceutical industry is expanding, and
there are many new scientific breakthroughs in the modern
day. As a result, moral concerns sparked by marketing
strategies have led to intense global debates. Pharmacies are
trying to market their products and maintain their
competitiveness, raising concerns about potential conflicts
between corporate interests and the fundamentals of
medical ethics. This article takes a multidisciplinary
approach, incorporating public health, bioethics, and
regulatory frameworks to begin a thorough investigation of
the complex ethical landscape surrounding pharmaceutical
marketing. The background section shows how
pharmaceutical marketing methods have evolved by closely
examining empirical evidence and ethical perspectives. It
demonstrates how the significant move toward direct-to-
consumer advertising (DTCA) has altered the healthcare
industry's operations. To illustrate how intricate modern
marketing strategies are, the article closely examines
various techniques, including sponsorships, patient
assistance programs, physician detailing, and promotional
materials. The piece's primary focus is its in-depth analysis
of ethics, founded on the fundamental ideas of beneficence,
justice, non-maleficence, and respect for individual liberty.
Pharmaceutical marketing has been scrutinized ethically
for an extended period. Opponents argue that practices
such as advertising and compensating doctors to promote
specific treatments are considered to breach medical ethics.
Advocates argue that the current methods are beneficial for
education and can be ethically utilized with adequate
regulation. This study examines the various perspectives in
the ongoing debate.
Critics argue that drug marketing results in an
excessive number of prescriptions for unnecessary
medications. False information about diseases is circulated
to create the perception that common illnesses require
pharmacological treatment. Studies indicate that exposure
to marketing is associated with increased prescription rates
and expenses, with no apparent health advantages for the
general population. Gifts and incentives provided to doctors
for marketing purposes are viewed as manipulative and
compromising the impartial examination of facts. Detailers
advocate for expedited utilization of new medications before
their efficacy and safety profiles are fully understood. Some
argue that direct-to-consumer advertising prioritizes
patients' desires over doctors' professional judgment. High
marketing expenses, which are transferred to prescription
pricing, create obstacles for individuals to get essential
medications.
Associates view marketing as a way to raise awareness
for overlooked disorders and educate doctors about novel
therapies. Advocates of marketing argue that false
advertising is against the law and that physicians rely
mostly on medical research when utilizing promotions.
According to polls, numerous doctors believe that
marketing does not influence them. Supporters also cite
evidence indicating that patients are adhering more strictly
to healthcare norms, and they argue that warnings provide
patients with sufficient information to make informed
judgments. Profits are used to fund future research projects
that must be commercialized before the patent expires.
Both parties utilize substantial evidence while also
depending on assumptions regarding impacts. Critics argue
that the objectives of marketing are inherently unethical in
contrast to evidence-based prescribing. Advocates argue
that with careful supervision, appropriate utilization is
achievable, albeit adjustments may be necessary. There is
limited research demonstrating the definitive effects of
something as either harmful or beneficial. Choosing the
correct strategy remains a challenging process that requires
making compromises. Creating ethically good norms
requires meticulous effort to prevent misconduct while also
allowing for the dissemination of knowledge. This problem
warrants a thorough examination from both an empirical
and normative perspective.
Keywords :
Pharmaceutical Marketing, Ethics, Direct-To- Consumer Advertising, Informed Consent, Healthcare Regulations, Conflicts Of Interest, Patient Autonomy, Beneficence, Non-Maleficence, Global Public Health, Bioethics.
References :
- American Medical Association (AMA). (2022). Code of Medical Ethics: Guidance on gifts to physicians from industry. https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/gifts-physicians-industry
- Angel, J. (2013). Pharmaceutical industry: The excessive cost of prescription drugs is draining taxpayer-funded programs. In J. E. Fletcher (Ed.), Problem-Based Learning: What business wants and business schools do (pp. 153-189). GlobaLens Publishing.
- Bélisle-Pipon, J. C. (2022). Pharmaceutical marketing ethics: ethical standards for more acceptable practices. Journal of Global Marketing, 35(1), 76-98.
- Bhutada, N. S., Menon, A. M., & Ejaz, M. (2022). Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs: Boon or bane? Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety, 13, 20420986221093161. https://doi.org/10.1177/20420986221093161
- Bhutada, N. S., Menon, A. M., & Ejaz, M. (2023). Ethical Concerns in Pharmaceutical Marketing Practices: A Global Perspective. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, 15(3), 45-62.
- Blake, H. C., & Early, E. K. (2010). Results of a national survey of consumer attitudes towards direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs. The Patient, 3(1), 19-22.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2022). Open Payments (Sunshine Act). https://www.cms.gov/OpenPayments
- Cousins, C. (2009). Pharmaceutical Marketing: The Unethical Reform of Industry. Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Kentucky. Gatton Student Research Publication, 1(2), 1-8.
- Datta, A., & Dave, D. (2017). Effects of physician-directed pharmaceutical promotion on prescription behaviors: Longitudinal evidence. Health Economics, 26(4), 450-468. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3319
- DeJong, C., Aguilar, T., Tseng, C. W., Lin, G. A., Boscardin, W. J., & Dudley, R. A. (2016). Pharmaceutical industry–sponsored meals and physician prescribing patterns for Medicare beneficiaries. JAMA Internal Medicine, 176(8), 1114-1122. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.2765
- DiMasi, J. A., Grabowski, H. G., & Hansen, R. W. (2016). Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs. Journal of Health Economics, 47, 20-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2016.01.012
- Fabbri, A., Santos Almeida, V., Chantelauze, M., Koch, C., Forte, P., Bocquillon, P., Flicoteaux, R., Cortaredona, S., Moatti, J. P., & Perrier, L. (2022). Sunlight policies: shedding light on the grey areas of the relationships between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: a narrative review. European Journal of Public Health, 32(1), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckab122
- Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2020). Prescription drug advertising: Questions and answers. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/prescription-drug-advertising/prescription-drug-advertising-questions-and-answers
- Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2022). The FDA's Drug Review Process: Ensuring Drugs Are Safe and Effective. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/information-consumers-and-patients-drugs/fdas-drug-review-process-ensuring-drugs-are-safe-and-effective
- Frazier, L. M., & Mostashari, F. (2001). The potential of national cholesterol education to improve cholesterol management in the United States. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 20(3), 101-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(00)00310-8
- Gagnon, M. A. (Ed.). (2013). Corporate influence and power: Issues and debates surrounding contemporary pharmaceutical marketing practices. In Corruption of pharmaceutical markets and global health. Springer.
- Gagnon, M. A., & Lexchin, J. (2008). The cost of pushing pills: A new estimate of pharmaceutical promotion expenditures in the United States. PLoS Medicine, 5(1), e1. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050001
- Gibbons, R. V., Landry, F. J., Blouch, D. L., Jones, D. L., Williams, F. K., Lucey, C. R., & Kroenke, K. (1998). A comparison of physicians' and patients' attitudes toward pharmaceutical industry gifts. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 13(3), 151-154. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00042.x
- Gilbody, S., Wilson, P., & Watt, I. (2005). Benefits and harms of direct to consumer advertising: A systematic review. BMJ Quality & Safety, 14(4), 246-250. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2004.012781
- Gönül, F. F., Carter, F., Petrova, E., & Srinivasan, K. (2001). Promotion of prescription drugs and its impact on physicians’ choice behavior. Journal of Marketing, 65(3), 79-90. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.65.3.79.18314
- Holmer, A. F. (2002). Direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising builds bridges between patients and physicians. JAMA, 288(4), 380-382. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.288.4.380
- Howard, D. H., Bach, P., Berndt, E. R., & Conti, R. M. (2015). Pricing in the Market for Anticancer Drugs. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(1), 139-62. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.29.1.139
- International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA). IFPMA Code of Practice. (2021). https://www.ifpma.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/IFPMA-Code-2021.pdf
- Kesselheim, A. S., Avorn, J., & Sarpatwari, A. (2016). The high cost of prescription drugs in the United States: Origins and prospects for reform. JAMA, 316(8), 858-871. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.11237
- Khowaja, R. H., & Feroz, A. (2020). Unethical pharmaceutical marketing in Pakistan: a systematic review. Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, 11(1), 55-60.
- Lemmens, T., & Hamburg, M. V. (2022). Pharmaceutical promotion and physician motivation. The New England Journal of Medicine, 387(3), 201-203. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2201915
- Limbu, Y. B., & Huhmann, B. A. (2022). Ethical issues in pharmaceutical marketing: A systematic review and future research agenda. Journal of Global Marketing, 35(1), 1-20.
- McKinney, W. P., Schiedermayer, D. L., Lurie, N., Simpson, D. E., Goodman, J. L., & Rich, E. C. (2005). Attitudes of internal medicine faculty and residents toward professional interaction with pharmaceutical sales representatives. JAMA, 284(16), 2093-2099. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.284.16.2093
- Mintzes, B. (2012). Advertising of prescription-only medicines to the public: Does evidence of benefit counterbalance harm?. Annual Review of Public Health, 33, 259-277. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124540
- Mintzes, B., Barer, M. L., Kravitz, R. L., Bassett, K., Lexchin, J., Kazanjian, A., Evans, R. G., Pan, R., & Marion, S. A. (2003). How does direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) affect prescribing? A survey in primary care environments with and without legal DTCA. CMAJ, 169(5), 405-412. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.1030014
- Moynihan, R., Heath, I., & Henry, D. (2002). Selling sickness: The pharmaceutical industry and disease mongering. BMJ, 324(7342), 886–891. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7342.886
- Mulinari, S. (2016). Unhealthy marketing of pharmaceutical products: An international public health concern. Journal of Public Health Policy, 37, 149-159.
- Murray, E., Lo, B., Pollack, L., Donelan, K., & Lee, K. (2004). Direct-to-consumer advertising: Public perceptions of its effects on health behaviors, health care, and the doctor-patient relationship. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 17(1), 6-18. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.17.1.6
- Pharmaceutical Marketing Code Authority (PMCA). (2021). PMCA code of conduct. https://www.pmcpa.org.uk/the-code/code-of-practice-2021/
- Rizzo, J. A. (1999). Advertising and competition in the ethical pharmaceutical industry: The case of antihypertensive drugs. Journal of Law and Economics, 42(1), 89-116. https://doi.org/10.1086/467414
- Rollins, B. L., & Perri, M. (2014). Pharmaceutical marketing. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
- Sarikwal, L., Gupta, J., Singhal, M. K., & Kaur, H. (2014). Direct to consumer advertising: A scourge or blessing in disguise?. Journal of Young Pharmacists, 6(4), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.5530/jyp.2014.4.1
- Sillup, G. P., & Porth, S. J. (2008). Ethical issues in the pharmaceutical industry: an analysis of US newspapers. International journal of pharmaceutical and healthcare marketing, 2(3), 163-180.
- Sismondo, S. (2013). The pharmaceutical soma: The naive ontology of direct-to-consumer drug advertising. Configurations, 21(3), 323-359. https://doi.org/10.1353/con.2013.0023
- Sismondo, S., Doucet, M., & Van Eeckhout, N. (2013). Publication ethics and the ghost management of medical publication. Bioethics, 28(7), 273-283. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12023
- Smolynets, I. B., Gutyj, B. V., Petryshak, O. Y., & Lytvyn, R. I. (2016). Pharmaceutical marketing: objectives and types. Науковий вісник Львівського національного університету ветеринарної медицини та біотехнологій імені СЗ Ґжицького, 18(2-4 (69)), 151-154.
- Spurling, G. K., Mansfield, P. R., Montgomery, B. D., Lexchin, J., Doust, J., Othman, N., & Vitry, A. I. (2010). Information from pharmaceutical companies and the quality, quantity, and cost of physicians' prescribing: A systematic review. PLoS Medicine, 7(10), e1000352. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000352
- Ventola, C. L. (2011). Direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising: therapeutic or toxic? Pharmacy and Therapeutics, 36(10), 669-684.
- World Health Organization. (2022). Direct-to-consumer advertising under fire. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 90(4), 237-238.
- World Medical Association (WMA). (2022). WMA statement on ethical considerations regarding health databases and biobanks. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-statement-on-ethical-considerations-regarding-health-databases-and-biobanks/
The pharmaceutical industry is expanding, and
there are many new scientific breakthroughs in the modern
day. As a result, moral concerns sparked by marketing
strategies have led to intense global debates. Pharmacies are
trying to market their products and maintain their
competitiveness, raising concerns about potential conflicts
between corporate interests and the fundamentals of
medical ethics. This article takes a multidisciplinary
approach, incorporating public health, bioethics, and
regulatory frameworks to begin a thorough investigation of
the complex ethical landscape surrounding pharmaceutical
marketing. The background section shows how
pharmaceutical marketing methods have evolved by closely
examining empirical evidence and ethical perspectives. It
demonstrates how the significant move toward direct-to-
consumer advertising (DTCA) has altered the healthcare
industry's operations. To illustrate how intricate modern
marketing strategies are, the article closely examines
various techniques, including sponsorships, patient
assistance programs, physician detailing, and promotional
materials. The piece's primary focus is its in-depth analysis
of ethics, founded on the fundamental ideas of beneficence,
justice, non-maleficence, and respect for individual liberty.
Pharmaceutical marketing has been scrutinized ethically
for an extended period. Opponents argue that practices
such as advertising and compensating doctors to promote
specific treatments are considered to breach medical ethics.
Advocates argue that the current methods are beneficial for
education and can be ethically utilized with adequate
regulation. This study examines the various perspectives in
the ongoing debate.
Critics argue that drug marketing results in an
excessive number of prescriptions for unnecessary
medications. False information about diseases is circulated
to create the perception that common illnesses require
pharmacological treatment. Studies indicate that exposure
to marketing is associated with increased prescription rates
and expenses, with no apparent health advantages for the
general population. Gifts and incentives provided to doctors
for marketing purposes are viewed as manipulative and
compromising the impartial examination of facts. Detailers
advocate for expedited utilization of new medications before
their efficacy and safety profiles are fully understood. Some
argue that direct-to-consumer advertising prioritizes
patients' desires over doctors' professional judgment. High
marketing expenses, which are transferred to prescription
pricing, create obstacles for individuals to get essential
medications.
Associates view marketing as a way to raise awareness
for overlooked disorders and educate doctors about novel
therapies. Advocates of marketing argue that false
advertising is against the law and that physicians rely
mostly on medical research when utilizing promotions.
According to polls, numerous doctors believe that
marketing does not influence them. Supporters also cite
evidence indicating that patients are adhering more strictly
to healthcare norms, and they argue that warnings provide
patients with sufficient information to make informed
judgments. Profits are used to fund future research projects
that must be commercialized before the patent expires.
Both parties utilize substantial evidence while also
depending on assumptions regarding impacts. Critics argue
that the objectives of marketing are inherently unethical in
contrast to evidence-based prescribing. Advocates argue
that with careful supervision, appropriate utilization is
achievable, albeit adjustments may be necessary. There is
limited research demonstrating the definitive effects of
something as either harmful or beneficial. Choosing the
correct strategy remains a challenging process that requires
making compromises. Creating ethically good norms
requires meticulous effort to prevent misconduct while also
allowing for the dissemination of knowledge. This problem
warrants a thorough examination from both an empirical
and normative perspective.
Keywords :
Pharmaceutical Marketing, Ethics, Direct-To- Consumer Advertising, Informed Consent, Healthcare Regulations, Conflicts Of Interest, Patient Autonomy, Beneficence, Non-Maleficence, Global Public Health, Bioethics.