Evaluation and Effectiveness of a Pharmaceutical-Based Drug Information Service

Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Drug Information & Safety Department Survey of Customer Needs and Satisfaction

“…This survey's overall return rate of 5 1.2% is higher than the rate usually reported for mail surveys (5,6,7). This may be attributed to the effectiveness of measures such as making presurvey calls to the subjects, offering an incentive for completion of the survey, including a postage-paid envelope, and using a brief, simple survey.…”

Pharmaceutical information: A 30‐year perspective on the literature

“…Externally—and the main reason for their existence—they provide information on their company's products to healthcare workers, particularly doctors and pharmacists. Although publicly available or externally produced sources may often be used by medical information departments, reliance is usually placed on in‐house databases of publications and other material on the company's products, created and maintained by the department (Gretz & Thomas 1995; Hull, 1996; Robson & Riggens, 2001; van Putte & Peperkamp, 1983); as examples, see Ortelli and Ferrario (1990), Bauman and Bettenhausen (1994), and Gasperino and Lynn (1995). In some circumstances, such databases have been integrated with current awareness services (Hodge & Walker, 1984).…”

“…A perennial issue is the extent to which information provision from the industry overlaps with marketing and advertising, particularly where information provision to the public, and to patients and patients' organizations and support groups, is concerned (Herxheimer, 2003; Young, Paterniti, Bell, & Kravitz, 2005). This is of particular importance because sales representatives and marketing departments are among the most important users of medical information departments (Bauman & Bettenhausen, 1994; Robson & Riggens, 2001; Yamamoto, Iizuka, Negai, Shimizu, Funabashi, & Okada, 1998). The sensitive nature of this kind of information provision is evidenced by a unique concern for deceitful enquiries; for example, by members of the public claiming to be medical practitioners or by employees of competitor companies who do not identify themselves (e.g., Curran, 2002).…”

“…A number of early studies examined the cost‐effectiveness of particular services in industrial information units (Ashmole, Smith, & Stern, 1973; Blick, 1977a, 1977b); although the methods used may no longer be regarded as appropriate, their pioneering nature may still be recognized. User surveys, to obtain qualitative understanding of the value of aspects of services, have formed another standard approach (e.g., Albano & Santhouse, 2003; Baker, 1990; Bauman & Bettenhausen, 1994; Hoffman & Gumbhir, 1993). More holistic approaches to service evaluation have used a mixed‐methods approach, linking cost analysis with user surveys and other means of assessing the value of information systems and services (Ljungberg & Tullgren, 1976, 1977; McElroy, 1982; Saltzman, 1995).…”

Survey of Health Care Practitioners’ Preferences for Medical Information: Collective Insights for Impacting Patient Care

“…To achieve this, many companies have conducted benchmarking surveys to solicit unbiased and relevant feedback on their overall MI services from customers. 1 -8 These survey results provided valuable information on the needs of the customers and may help companies assess their internal operational processes and shape strategic directions. Though there have been multiple surveys conducted to assess areas of improvement across several companies, specific surveys to gain insights on the utility of MI services across the pharmaceutical industry, as well as understanding if the information provided the evidence necessary to prescribe with confidence have not been addressed.…”