Overview
A comprehensive survey was conducted across various locations in India to explore the correlation between pharmaceutical detailing and prescription behaviors, particularly among Non-MBBS physicians. A team of trained research assistants collected voluntary responses from 372 physicians, including 198 Clinical Practitioners/General Practitioners (CP/GPs) and 174 Non-MBBS physicians who regularly prescribe allopathic antibiotics. Participants were acknowledged with a letter of appreciation for their contributions.
Sample and Procedure
The survey focused on two antibiotics, Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (price regulated in 2013) and Cefpodoxime (not price regulated at the time of the survey), chosen for their comparability in market value and level of market share among the top firms. Physicians reported on the brands they prescribed and the frequency and duration of detailing received for these brands. This resulted in a substantial dataset of 966 observations from MBBS doctors and 722 from Non-MBBS physicians (summary measures in Table W12 below).
Analysis and Results
Our analysis, aimed at assessing the link between detailing efforts and prescription rates, revealed a positive correlation between the frequency of pharmaceutical detailing and the percentage of specific brands prescribed (results in Table 9 below). Notably, the effect of detailing on prescription behavior was significantly more pronounced among Non-MBBS physicians, indicating that reductions in detailing were closely associated with a decrease in prescriptions within this group. This finding indicates the critical role of detailing in influencing prescription practices among Non-MBBS physicians, who rely heavily on such interactions for drug information.
| Measure | CP/GPs | Non-MBBS physicians |
|---|---|---|
| Sample size | 198 | 174 |
| Experience (no. of years) | 16.30 (12.29) | 17.02 (10.27) |
| No. of brands prescribed | ||
| Amoxycillin-clavulanic acid | 2.95 (1.34) | 2.89 (1.26) |
| Cefpodoxime | 1.93 (1.01) | 1.26 (0.98) |
| Detailing | ||
| Frequency (in a month) | 5.64 (9.8) | 5.04 (6.99) |
| Duration (per visit) | 8.37 (11.06) | 8.50 (12.54) |
| Perceived brand effectiveness | 4.69 (1.57) | 4.34 (1.82) |
| Perceived firm expensiveness | 4.07 (1.43) | 3.98 (1.53) |
| Perceived firm effectiveness | 4.87 (1.48) | 4.56 (1.69) |
Note: Std. Dev. in parentheses
| Explanatory variables | (1) log (brand Rx%) | (2) log (brand Rx%) | (3) log (brand Rx%) | (4) log (brand Rx%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| log (MR visits) | 1.261** (0.587) | 1.171** (0.592) | 0.795** (0.402) | .814** (0.407) |
| Is NonMBBS | 2.945 (12.179) | 3.88 (12.429) | -8.554 (11.403) | -8.137 (12.047) |
| Is NonMBBS * log (MR Visits) | 3.997* (2.319) | 3.857* (2.116) | 4.649** (2.181) | 4.675** (2.200) |
| Perceived molecule effectiveness | -0.154 (0.813) | -0.305 (0.705) | -0.291 (0.702) | |
| Perceived brand effectiveness | 6.451*** (0.713) | 6.533*** (0.703) | ||
| Perceived expensiveness (firm) | 0.024* (0.014) | |||
| Perceived effectiveness (firm) | 0.393 (0.734) | |||
| Constant | 9.834*** (2.349) | 10.133** (4.707) | 12.612** (5.872) | 10.343 (6.767) |
| Observations | 1,688 | 1,688 | 1,688 | 1,688 |
| R-squared | 0.305 | 0.306 | 0.47 | 0.473 |
| Physician | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Molecule | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| Brand | Yes | Yes |
Robust standard errors in parentheses
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1