UK patient groups say that pharma should do more on being transparent
Embargoed publication date: Monday, 23rd April 2018 6AM GMTPress release based on the results of a new report: 'The Corporate Reputation of Pharma, 2017—the Perspective of UK Patient Groups'
Contact details at end of email - This independent study, funded by PatientView, represents the perspectives of 83 UK-based patient groups on the corporate reputation of 15 individual pharma companies, and of the pharma industry as a whole, during 2017. The opinions of the UK patient groups, which were gathered in a survey conducted November 2017-February 2018, are compared in the report with those from the entire worldwide body of 1,330 patient groups which responded to the PatientView annual study, ‘The Corporate Reputation of Pharma—from a Patient Perspective’, and with the UK
patient-group responses from the previous year (2016).
- The 15 pharma companies reviewed for their corporate reputation in the 2017 study are: AbbVie I Amgen I AstraZeneca I Bayer I Boehringer Ingelheim I Bristol-Myers Squibb I Eli Lilly (Lilly) I GSK I Janssen I Merck & Co (MSD in the UK) I Novartis I Pfizer I Roche I Sanofi I Teva.
- The UK corporate-reputation
survey is now in its 6th edition—thus, 6 years of historical data are available. In addition, we incorporated several important new indicators of corporate reputation into the 2017 survey—to reflect the changing, and more demanding, relationships that now exist between patient groups and pharma companies.
- The UK patient groups responding to the 2017 survey assessed the 15 companies for their excellence at: * patient centricity; * the provision of high-quality patient information; * patient safety; * the provision of high-quality products; * transparency (in pricing policies; in sharing the results of clinical data; and in the funding of external stakeholders); * integrity; * providing services 'beyond the pill'; * engaging
patients (in research, and in development).
What UK patient groups say about pharma’s activities …
UK patient groups, like their peers in the rest of the world, assessed the pharma industry's corporate reputation as being slightly higher in 2017 than it was in 2016. However, only 28.6% of 2017's UK patient groups saw the industry's corporate reputation as "Excellent" or "Good", compared with 42.9% of the 1,330 patient groups worldwide. The 2017 results also indicate that UK patient groups think the pharma industry still has a long way to go in corporate reputation.
Although UK patient groups rated the pharma industry as having a better overall corporate reputation in 2017, pharma was judged lacking by those same UK patient groups in many of its corporate activities. Most notable was pharma's lack of transparency at sharing clinical data.
- Just 8% of 2017's 83 UK patient groups thought pharma "Excellent" or "Good" at being transparentin the sharing of clinical data.
Results for individual pharma companies ...AbbVie ranked overall 1st in 2017 for corporate reputation among 15 pharma companies, according to the 23 respondent UK patient groups claiming familiarity with the company. UK patient groups also ranked AbbVie 1st in 2017 for three of the 12 indicators of corporate reputation used in the 2017 survey: * the provision of patient information; * high-quality products, useful to patients; and * transparency in its funding of external healthcare stakeholders.
The companies ranking top for each of 2017's 12 indicators of corporate reputation are shown in the accompanying table. One striking finding is that no single company manages to excel in all indicators of corporate reputation. Instead, individual companies do well in, at most, one or several, indicators of corporate reputation.
In the case of transparency of clinical data, GSK ranked top (probably due to its spearheading of improvements in the area).
Some companies saw a significant improvement in their results Rising stars within the 2017 rankings among UK patient groups familiar with companies: - Bristol-Myers Squibb jumped nine places in the UK rankings—from overall 16th in 2016 (out of 17 companies), to overall 7th in 2017 (out of 15 companies). Noteworthy for 2017 were the significant increases in ranking that B-MS achieved for its patient-group partnerships, and for patient centricity. B-MS ranked 3rd and 5th
(respectively) in the UK for these two indicators in 2017. B-MS also ranked 1st in the UK in 2017 for transparency at pricing policies.
- Novartis jumped seven places in the UK rankings—from overall 11th in 2016 (out of 17 companies), to overall 4th in 2017 (out of 15 companies). Novartis saw significant improvements in 2017 in its performance in the UK at many of the indicators of corporate reputation. The company ranked 1st in the UK in 2017 for the effectiveness of its patient-group partnerships—a fact echoed in Novartis’ Net Prometer Score (a standard measure of customer loyalty) of +55.6%. Novartis was the only company in 2017's UK patient-group assessment to achieve a positive NPS measure.
- Teva also jumped seven places in the UK rankings—from overall 15th in 2016 (out of 17 companies), to overall 8th in 2017 (out of 15 companies). UK patient groups familiar with the company marked Teva up in 2017 for several indicators of corporate reputation, placing the company in the higher tier of the UK league tables for four indicators of corporate reputation: * high-quality products; * transparency on pricing policies; * transparency on the sharing of clinical data; and * the provision of services ‘beyond the pill’.
|