Pharmaceutical firms spend a significant amount of their budget on promotions. Thus, it becomes imperative to study the perception of physicians, at whom a major share of these promotional efforts is targeted. Despite this, there exists very little published research examining customer response at the perceptual level. Thus, the authors have attempted to study the importance attached to promotion tools as information sources and the extent to which these promotion tools influence prescription behavior as perceived by physicians. Primary data for the study was collected through a survey of physicians. A total of 115 physicians participated in the study. The study indicates that physicians perceive conferences/symposia to be the most credible information source. An examination of the relationship between perceptions regarding various promotion tools and demographic variables indicates a significant relationship between gender and type of hospital and credibility attached to the various promotional tools. The study indicates a positive correlation between credibility of promotion tools and the extent to which it influences prescription behavior.
Rosenthal MB, Berndt ER, Donohue JM, et al. Demand effects of recent changes in prescription drug promotion. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, Menlo Park, CA, 2003.
2.
LimCWKirikoshiT. Predicting the effects of physician-directed promotion on prescription yield and sales update using neural networks. J Targeting Measur Anal2005; 13(2156–167, Henry Stewart Publications.
AkandeTMAderibigbeSA. Influence of drug promotion on prescribing habits of doctors in a teaching hospital. African J Med Med Sci2007; 36(3207–211.
5.
HemminkiE. Review of literature on the factors affecting drug prescribing. Social Sci Med1975; 9: 111–116.
6.
BednarikJ. Does brand differentiate pharmaceuticals?Neuro Endocrinol Lett2005; 26(6635–652.
7.
Thompson DL. Industrial advertisements and the purchasing agent. J Purchasing 1966; 2: 5–16.
8.
Taneja G and Arora U. Physician perception towards promotional tools offered by pharmaceutical industry. A comparative age wise analysis. J IPM Meerut 2006; 7(2): 1–11.
9.
Taneja G and Arora U. An analytical study of physicians behavior towards marketing of pharmaceutical products. Ind J Marketing 2006; 36(11): 10–13.
10.
Kotler P. Marketing management – Analysis, planning, implementation and control. 7th ed. New Delhi, India: Prentice hall, 1992, pp.69–567.
11.
CampoKDe StaebelOGijsbrechtsE. Physicians' decision process for drug prescription and the impact of pharmaceutical marketing mix instruments. Health Market Q2005; 22(473–107.
12.
CreyerEHHrsistodoulakisI. Marketing pharmaceutical products to physicians. Mark Health Serv1998; 18(234–38.
13.
Brand R and Kumar P. Detailing gets personal. Pharmaceut Excecutive 2003; 23(8): 66.
14.
CutronaSLWoolhandlerSLasserKE. Characteristics of recipients of free prescription drug samples: a nationally representative analysis. Am J Public Health2008; 98: 284–289.
15.
GrovesKESketrisITettSE. Prescription drug samples--does this marketing strategy counteract policies for quality use of medicines?J Clin Pharm Therapeut2003; 28(4259–271.
16.
HalifaxNS. Faculty of management, school of business, Dalhousie University, Canada. J Clin Pharm Ther2003; 28(4259–271.
17.
Mizik N and Robert J. Are physicians “Easy Marks”? Quantifying the effects of detailing and sampling on new prescriptions. Manage Sci 2004.
18.
Dye P. The Healing Touch. Economic Times, Brand Equity Wednesday May 7, 2008; p.3.
19.
DonohueJMBerndtERRosenthalM. Effects of pharmaceutical promotion on adherence to the treatment guidelines for depression. Med Care2004; 42(121176–1185.
20.
LalA. Pharmaceutical drug promotion: how it is being practiced in India?J Assoc Physicians India2001; 49: 266–273.
21.
HemminkiC. The role of prescriptions in therapy. Med Care1975; 13(2150–159.
22.
Martilla JA. Word-of-mouth communication in industrial adoption process. J Market Res 1971; 8(2): 173–178.
Ferber R and Wales HG. The effectiveness of pharmaceutical advertising: a case study. J Market 1958; 22(4): 398.
25.
Parasuraman A. The relative importance of industrial promotional tools. Ind Market Manage 1981; 10: 277–281.
26.
EvansKRBeltraminiRF. Physician acquisition of prescription drug information. J Healthcare Market1986; 8(415–25.
27.
VancelikSBeyhunNEAcemogluH. Impact of pharmaceutical promotion on prescribing decisions of general practitioners in Eastern Turkey. BMC Public Health2007; 7(147122–122.
28.
Goldmerg LM, Lorimer EJ and Goldmerg M. Why physicians come to your exhibit. J Med Market 2006; 6: 188–194.
29.
RabinDL. Use of medicines: a review of prescribing and non-prescribing medicine use. Med Care Rev1972; 29: 668–699.
30.
WaltonH. Ad recognition and prescribing by physicians. J Advert Res1980; 20: 39–48.
31.
Bauer RA and Lawrence HW. Doctor’s Choice: the physician and his sources of information about drugs. J Market Res 1966; 3(1): 40–47.
32.
HessSW. Communicating with physicians. J Advert Res1974; 14: 13–18.
33.
StolleyPDBeckerMHLasagnaL. The relationship between physician characteristics and prescribing approppriateness. Med Care1972; 10: 17–28.
34.
ColemanJKatzEMenzelH. The diffusion of an innovation among physicians. Sociometry1957; 20: 253–270.
35.
NairSHPuneetMTulikaB. Asymmetric social interactions in physician prescription behavior: the role of opinion leaders. J Market Res2010; 47: 883–895.
36.
Van den BulteCLilienGL. Medical innovation revisited: social contagion versus marketing effort. Am J Sociol2001; 106: 1409–1435.
37.
Watts DJ and Dodds PS. Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation. J Consumer Res 2007.
38.
Chaganti RS. Pharmaceutical marketing in India. New Delhi: GIFT (Gitam Institute of Foreign Trade) in association with Excel Books private limited, 2009, pp.1–6.
39.
Government of India, Department of Pharmaceuticals, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, www.pharmaceuticals.gov.in/ (2012, accessed 24 June 2012).
40.
Article India’s Pharmaceutical Industry on course for globalisation “Deutshe Bank Research” April 9, 2008.
