Meera Patel1, Leena Jindia2, Stacey Fung3, Richard Kadowaki4, Kirstie Marasigan5,6. 1. Janssen Scientific Affairs, 1125 Trenton Harbourton Rd, Titusville, NJ, 08560, USA. Mpatel23@its.jnj.com. 2. Janssen Scientific Affairs, 1125 Trenton Harbourton Rd, Titusville, NJ, 08560, USA. 3. Gilead Sciences, Foster City, CA, USA. 4. AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, USA. 5. Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA. 6. Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A benchmarking survey was conducted by the pharmaceutical collaboration for transparent Medical Information (phactMI™) consortium, with the goal to capture insights from the 27 member companies and their medical information organizations. METHODS: phactMI™ Benchmarking Committee delivered an electronic survey to 27 United States (US) member companies' Medical Information (MI) departments between December 12, 2017 and February 20, 2018. The survey consisted of approximately 300 questions, divided into 9 topics which included multiple choice and open-ended questions about the following categories: medical information support provided based on different product lifecycles, key metrics measured to assess department performance, and other key services provided by medical information groups. RESULTS: The extent of MI product support varied across the lifecycle of a product. Most companies provided MI product support throughout the product lifecycle starting from investigational all the way through mature; however, the extent of activities varied. The top key performance indicators (KPIs) that were reported to senior leadership included response turnaround time (59%) and inquiry volume (48%). Among the 27 companies, 85% noted using customer satisfaction surveys administered via links within written response documents and 52% verbally via the company's call center. Other services with which MI groups noted most involvement included congress booth support (100%), insights/metric reporting (96%), and training the sales force on the MI function (74%). Additional services included payor support clinical pathway submissions (22%), presenting at advisory boards (22%), and competitive intelligence (26%). CONCLUSION: The results of this survey provide pharmaceutical MI groups with opportunities to consider services or activities that could enhance the support these groups provide to their customers and business partners.
BACKGROUND: A benchmarking survey was conducted by the pharmaceutical collaboration for transparent Medical Information (phactMI™) consortium, with the goal to capture insights from the 27 member companies and their medical information organizations. METHODS: phactMI™ Benchmarking Committee delivered an electronic survey to 27 United States (US) member companies' Medical Information (MI) departments between December 12, 2017 and February 20, 2018. The survey consisted of approximately 300 questions, divided into 9 topics which included multiple choice and open-ended questions about the following categories: medical information support provided based on different product lifecycles, key metrics measured to assess department performance, and other key services provided by medical information groups. RESULTS: The extent of MI product support varied across the lifecycle of a product. Most companies provided MI product support throughout the product lifecycle starting from investigational all the way through mature; however, the extent of activities varied. The top key performance indicators (KPIs) that were reported to senior leadership included response turnaround time (59%) and inquiry volume (48%). Among the 27 companies, 85% noted using customer satisfaction surveys administered via links within written response documents and 52% verbally via the company's call center. Other services with which MI groups noted most involvement included congress booth support (100%), insights/metric reporting (96%), and training the sales force on the MI function (74%). Additional services included payor support clinical pathway submissions (22%), presenting at advisory boards (22%), and competitive intelligence (26%). CONCLUSION: The results of this survey provide pharmaceutical MI groups with opportunities to consider services or activities that could enhance the support these groups provide to their customers and business partners.
Keywords:
Key performance indicators; Medical information; Product support; Services; Survey