Monitoring Consumer Sentiment in Pharma

Sifting through social media sources is one of the best ways to find information regarding new technology.  While perusing Twitter, we came across this article written by Jennifer Zaino of semanticweb.com.  With today’s world of constant data streams, managing it all and applying it in a meaningful way is a priority of successful companies.  Effectively utilizing this data requires semantic technology and sentiment analytics, and in turn, a user or business can continuously adapt their social customer relationship management (CRM).  Gartner, a leading information technology research and advisory company, recently released its Magic Quadrant for social CRM. 

Several players exist in the semantic technology arena that work with companies to develop business strategies and social experiences that generate improvements for sales, marketing, and customer service, while also benefiting online communities.  Gartner has divided these players into the following four quadrants based on completeness of vision and the ability to execute that vision: niche players, visionaries, challengers, and leaders.  On this spectrum of social CRM players, it is evident that the leaders, such as salesforce.com, are the ones that effectively utilize social and sentiment analysis strategies that are evolving with today’s world of social media and ever developing  “emotional state” of the Internet.  Learning from the leaders of this area of information technology will allow for better overall consumer experiences across industries.  Going beyond keywords for developing a sense of consumer sentiment will be the new normal, and those who effectively utilize this information technology, will be the leaders of their respective industries going forward.   

With regard to pharma, noticeable improvements will be necessary in the future regarding the consumer experience.  Developing efficient methods of monitoring consumer sentiment of various biopharma products will allow companies and healthcare providers to adjust quickly (assuming they are willing to) and provide necessary support for patients in times of non-compliance.  

Prescription Smartphone Apps for Medication Adherence

When it comes to embracing new technology, we like to think that we are ahead of the curve.  However, our approval is only bestowed upon technology that provides a substantial benefit, especially given costs or numerous unavoidable advertisements. As illustrated in a recent article by Pamela Lewis Dolan at American Medical News, a new wave of technology will become the norm in healthcare by way of smartphone and tablet apps that will allow physicians to closely monitor many aspects of patient compliance. 

There are a few questions however for the future implementation of these “prescribed apps”:

1. Does the app serve a utility that is worth the cost/adherence?
2. How much data will the app produce for the patients?  
3. Will the physician have the time/man power to properly utilize the data?
4. How will physicians monetize the use of the apps?
5. With data being retrieved without office visits, will this mean decreased revenue?
6. As with any prescribed therapy, how does a physician ensure patient compliance?
7. Will health-related apps be regulated by the FDA?

Physician-patient communication desperately needs creative improvements to ensure therapy compliance and persistence.  With the growing use of smartphones, using healthcare apps and the field of mobile health is only expanding in the coming years. The FDA has already approved a select number of apps to deal with clinical care and bills are currently in place to create an FDA Office of Mobile Health.  For a fraction of the cost for an office visit, patients can purchase an app that allows them and their physician to monitor health progression, collect critical health outcome data between office visits that may reduce visits to the office.  

We know medication adherence and health outcomes can be improved by allowing healthcare professionals to track metrics that normally are not monitored, such as heart rate, glucose levels, and calorie count.  This is not driving the conversation out of the exam room, but extending the reach of the physicians diagnostic and treatment capabilities.  With 10% of smartphone users having downloaded health-related apps, the practice of “Prescribing an app” will continue to catch on.  Generating a large market from the almost 1 billion smartphone user base will be as easy as posting that picture of dinner to Instagram. 

Invest in Healthcare, But What Exactly?

A recent Wall Street Journal piece regarding why pharma is having problems producing effective product caught our eye. The Feb. 9 op-ed article, called “Health-Care Investment: The Hidden Crisis” [subscription-only access] lays out ways that Washington “can remove some of the barriers to growth in medical research.” Its author: Michael Milken.

He argues that “improved public health translates directly into greater national productivity, which underpins all economic growth.” He cites figures showing how life-expectancy gains have added to America’s prosperity, and expresses concern that cuts in NIH funding “will cause some younger medical scientists to either change careers or take their work to places like Singapore” which welcome researchers.

The barriers he talks about are the usual suspects: anticipated patent expirations, regulatory issues, qualms about litigation exposure, and high U.S. taxes on repatriated overseas earnings.

Mr. Milken is on point linking ROI and extended lifespan. The study he cites –- that gains in life-expectancy since 1970 have added $3.2 trillion per year to "America's national wealth" – is impressive. We further argue that if more attention were paid to medication adherence, then that figure would be even more impressive.

Mr. Milken also argues that the FDA needs more resources to “keep up with the pace of innovation in such areas as medical-device development and regenerative medicine.” Agreed – let alone with inspecting clinical trials on foreign soil.

But let’s also consider this: The FDA needs resources to find different ways to solve their medical information problems. While the FDA guards public health, the FDA doesn’t produce good guidance on medical information and as a result industry may not provide good medical information to the patients using its products. A few years ago, the public didn’t have access to this information, but now it does. And the public will be talking about this information on social media sites. We believe the FDA isn’t moving quickly enough on its social site regulations or being adaptive enough about the content it regulates. It needs the time and resources to define flexible policies, not to apply additional funds to enforcement.


To our way of thinking, the FDA should become less regulator, and more healthcare-outcome policy initiator and promoter.