 Advertisement | ||||||||
 | ||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
|
From the Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Mintzes, Barer, Bassett, Evans), the Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics (Mintzes, Bassett), the Department of Health Care and Epidemiology (Barer, Bassett, Kazanjian, Marion), the Department of Family Practice (Bassett) and the Department of Economics (Evans), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC; the Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care (Kravitz) and the Department of Pediatrics (Pan), University of California, Davis, Los Angeles, Calif.; the School of Health Policy and Management, York University (Lexchin), Toronto, Ont.; and the Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto (Lexchin), Toronto, Ont.
Correspondence to: Dr. Barbara Mintzes, Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, #429–2194 Health Sciences Mall, University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC V6T 1Z3; fax 604 822-5690; bmintzes{at}chspr.ubc.ca
Background: Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs has increased rapidly in the United States during the last decade, yet little is known about its effects on prescribing decisions in primary care. We compared prescribing decisions in a US setting with legal DTCA and a Canadian setting where DTCA of prescription drugs is illegal, but some cross-border exposure occurs.
Methods: We recruited primary care physicians working in Sacramento, California, and Vancouver, British Columbia, and their group practice partners to participate in the study. On pre- selected days, patients aged 18 years or more completed a questionnaire before seeing their physician. We asked these patients' physicians to complete a brief questionnaire immediately following the selected patient visit. By pairing individual patient and physician responses, we determined how many patients had been exposed to some form of DTCA, the frequency of patients' requests for prescriptions for advertised medicines and the frequency of prescriptions that were stimulated by the patients' requests. We measured physicians' confidence in treatment choice for each new prescription by asking them whether they would prescribe this drug to a patient with the same condition.
Results: Seventy-eight physicians (Sacramento n = 38, Vancouver n = 40) and 1431 adult patients (Sacramento n = 683, Vancouver n = 748), or 61% of patients who consulted participating physicians on pre-set days, participated in the survey. Exposure to DTCA was higher in Sacramento, although 87.4% of Vancouver patients had seen prescription drug advertisements. Of the Sacramento patients, 7.2% requested advertised drugs as opposed to 3.3% in Vancouver (odds ratio [OR] 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2–4.1). Patients with higher self- reported exposure to advertising, conditions that were potentially treatable by advertised drugs, and/or greater reliance on advertising requested more advertised medicines. Physicians fulfilled most requests for DTCA drugs (for 72% of patients in Vancouver and 78% in Sacramento); this difference was not statistically significant. Patients who requested DTCA drugs were much more likely to receive 1 or more new prescriptions (for requested drugs or alternatives) than those who did not request DTCA drugs (OR 16.9, 95% CI 7.5–38.2). Physicians judged 50.0% of new prescriptions for requested DTCA drugs to be only "possible" or "unlikely" choices for other similar patients, as compared with 12.4% of new prescriptions not requested by patients (p < 0.001).
Interpretation: Our results suggest that more advertising leads to more requests for advertised medicines, and more prescriptions. If DTCA opens a conversation between patients and physicians, that conversation is highly likely to end with a prescription, often despite physician ambivalence about treatment choice.
Related Articles
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  L. S. Lal and P. V. Rosenau Evaluation of Rational Use of Medications in the United States Journal of Primary Care & Community Health, April 1, 2010; 1(1): 62 - 68. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. A. Paterniti, T. L. Fancher, C. S. Cipri, S. Timmermans, J. Heritage, and R. L. Kravitz Getting to "No": Strategies Primary Care Physicians Use to Deny Patient Requests Arch Intern Med, February 22, 2010; 170(4): 381 - 388. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. L. Frosch, D. Grande, D. M. Tarn, and R. L. Kravitz A Decade of Controversy: Balancing Policy With Evidence in the Regulation of Prescription Drug Advertising Am J Public Health, January 1, 2010; 100(1): 24 - 32. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Jutel and D. B Menkes "But Doctors do it...": Nurses' Views of Gifts and Information from the Pharmaceutical Industry Ann. Pharmacother., June 1, 2009; 43(6): 1057 - 1063. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Wong-Rieger Should Canada allow direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs?: YES Can Fam Physician, February 1, 2009; 55(2): 130 - 132. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Mintzes Should Canada allow direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs?: NO Can Fam Physician, February 1, 2009; 55(2): 131 - 133. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Wong-Rieger Le Canada devrait-il autoriser la publicite directe des medicaments d'ordonnance?: OUI Can Fam Physician, February 1, 2009; 55(2): 134 - 138. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Mintzes Le Canada devrait-il autoriser la publicite directe des medicaments d'ordonnance?: NON Can Fam Physician, February 1, 2009; 55(2): 135 - 138. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. Parnes, P. C. Smith, C. Gilroy, J. Quintela, C. B. Emsermann, L. M. Dickinson, and J. M. Westfall Lack of Impact of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising on the Physician-Patient Encounter in Primary Care: A SNOCAP Report Ann. Fam. Med, January 1, 2009; 7(1): 41 - 46. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. L. Schaffer, K. J. Bozic, L. D. Dorr, D. A. Miller, and J. V. Nepola AOA Symposium. Direct-to-Consumer Marketing in Orthopaedic Surgery: Boon or Boondoggle? J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., November 1, 2008; 90(11): 2534 - 2543. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. R Law, S. R Majumdar, and S. B Soumerai Effect of illicit direct to consumer advertising on use of etanercept, mometasone, and tegaserod in Canada: controlled longitudinal study BMJ, September 2, 2008; 337(sep02_1): a1055 - a1055. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. F Woollard Continuing medical education in the 21st century BMJ, August 22, 2008; 337(aug22_1): a119 - a119. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. C. Hebert MD MHSc Direct-to-consumer advertising: end the compromise Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 15, 2008; 179(2): 119 - 119. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. C. Hebert MD MHSc La publicite directe au consommateur : fini les compromis Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 15, 2008; 179(2): 121 - 121. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. C. Stange Time to Ban Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Marketing Ann. Fam. Med, March 1, 2007; 5(2): 101 - 104. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. A. Abel, R. T. Penson, S. Joffe, L. Schapira, B. A. Chabner, and T. J. Lynch Jr. Direct-to-Consumer Advertising in Oncology. Oncologist, February 1, 2006; 11(2): 217 - 226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Graham Smart Regulation: Will the government's strategy work? Can. Med. Assoc. J., December 6, 2005; 173(12): 1469 - 1470. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. S. Sierles, A. C. Brodkey, L. M. Cleary, F. A. McCurdy, M. Mintz, J. Frank, D. J. Lynn, J. Chao, B. Z. Morgenstern, W. Shore, et al. Medical Students' Exposure to and Attitudes About Drug Company Interactions: A National Survey JAMA, September 7, 2005; 294(9): 1034 - 1042. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S Gilbody, P Wilson, and I Watt Benefits and harms of direct to consumer advertising: a systematic review Qual. Saf. Health Care, August 1, 2005; 14(4): 246 - 250. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. L. Kravitz, R. M. Epstein, M. D. Feldman, C. E. Franz, R. Azari, M. S. Wilkes, L. Hinton, and P. Franks Influence of Patients' Requests for Direct-to-Consumer Advertised Antidepressants: A Randomized Controlled Trial JAMA, April 27, 2005; 293(16): 1995 - 2002. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. F. Hollon Direct-to-Consumer Advertising: A Haphazard Approach to Health Promotion JAMA, April 27, 2005; 293(16): 2030 - 2033. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Lacroix Direct-to-consumer advertising Can. Med. Assoc. J., March 2, 2004; 170(5): 770 - 770. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. R. Graham Direct-to-consumer advertising Can. Med. Assoc. J., March 2, 2004; 170(5): 768 - 770. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Mintzes, K. L. Bassett, and M. L. Barer Direct-to-consumer advertising Can. Med. Assoc. J., March 2, 2004; 170(5): 770 - 771. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Does Direct-to-Consumer Drug Advertising Affect Prescribing Behavior? Journal Watch Psychiatry, November 20, 2003; 2003(1120): 16 - 16. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Does Direct-to-Consumer Drug Advertising Affect Prescribing Behavior? Journal Watch Cardiology, November 14, 2003; 2003(1114): 3 - 3. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Does Direct-to-Consumer Drug Advertising Affect Prescribing Behavior? Journal Watch (General), October 14, 2003; 2003(1014): 6 - 6. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minerva BMJ, September 20, 2003; 327(7416): 690 - 690. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ads and prescription pads Can. Med. Assoc. J., September 2, 2003; 169(5): 381 - 381. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annonces et blocs d'ordonnances Can. Med. Assoc. J., September 2, 2003; 169(5): 383 - 383. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
Read all eLetters
| HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | COLLECTIONS | HELP | SEARCH |
|
|||||
|
Copyright 1995-2003, Canadian Medical Association. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329
(e) 0820-3946 (p)
All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association. |
|||||
