PERCEPTION OF PHARMACO-EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES BY PHYSICIANS AND MOTIVATION TO PARTICIPATE- FRENCH SITUATION

Author(s)

Schmidely N1, Bonhomme C1, Veysseyre H2, Nechadi S2, Mechin H2, Longin J21Bristol-Myers Squibb, Rueil Malmaison, France, 2REGISTRAT-MAPI, Lyon, France

OBJECTIVES: Recent development of Health Technology Assessment worldwide increased requirement for real world data (e,g, risk management plans, drugs utilization). Primary non-interventional research (NIR) involving physicians able to enrol patients is a means to generate such data. One key challenge of NIRs is the capacity to reflect real life conditions by providing unbiased estimations of physicians’ behaviours and patients outcomes in large representative samples. Participation of physicians is often an issue when conducting NIRs. Lack of understanding of scientific value of NIRs, compared to clinical trials, is often assumed to be the major reason for reluctance to participate. Our objective was to better understand perception of, motivation to participate in and expectation from participation in NIRs by physicians. METHODS: A survey was conducted in France on representative samples of 196 psychiatrists, 221 cardiologists and 250 general practitioners. Demographic characteristics were used to check representativeness. Perception of NIRs’ scientific interest, motivation criteria and expectations were assed and analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: >70% of physicians are convinced that NIRs are of scientific interest and provide reliable information on drug utilization in real life conditions. However, 10-15% are not convinced, 10-20% don’t have any opinion. Motivation relates to interest for scientific objective and studied disease (>90%), scientific rigour and credibility of partners (IRB review, scientific committee, sponsor) (>70%). NIRs requested by Health Authorities are not incentive. Physicians appreciate contributing to improving knowledge about drugs (>80%). >70% consider NIRs a challenging opportunity to compare their behaviour to their peers’. All (>90%) are interested in receiving results. 49% and 89% think results should be available within 6 and 12 months respectively. CONCLUSIONS: NIRs are recognized as a rigorous scientific tool by a majority of physicians. Motivation to participate is based on all scientific components of NIR. Results are expected in short term timeframe.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2010-11, ISPOR Europe 2010, Prague, Czech Republic

Value in Health, Vol. 13, No. 7 (November 2010)

Code

PHP89

Topic

Health Service Delivery & Process of Care

Topic Subcategory

Health Care Research

Disease

Multiple Diseases

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×