Medicines & Co case study
Angiomax was a blood thinner used for patients undergoing high risk balloon angioplasty. This drug had better results for the patients’ vs the current cheaper alternative, heparin. While the perceived cost of angiomax was much higher, the cost of treatment worked out much cheaper for the hospital with the drug. (In case an angioplasty failed and patient had to receive a repeat angioplasty, it was a loss to hospitals. Angiomax helped reduce this cost to hospitals and helped reduce risk of repeat angioplasty).
The business challenge here was to justify the higher price of drug by highlighting its significant benefits to multiple decision makers through effective marketing and education efforts.
Since the failure
Financial incentives play a significant role in how care is provided. The North Ohio Heart Center was found to perform more angioplasties compared to the Cleveland Clinic performing bypass surgeries resulting in different incentive rates (McLaughlin & McLaughlin, 2015). These non-invasive procedures (angioplasties) generated highly profitable incomes for the physicians involved at the North Ohio Heart Center. The physicians perceived these procedures to be a safer option of treatment as opposed to drug treatment or bypass surgery. These decisions impacted patient care by causing more patient visits and more tests being performed generating a cumulative higher reimbursement. These incentives are moving us away from what is best for the patient. Robert Doherty, ACP senior vice president, stated, “we need to move away from the piecemeal approach: how many visits you can generate, how many tests
In our experience with Pharmasim we learned that Marketing decision making must be very sensitive and responsive to everything going on in the industry which is very complex. Consumer responses to marketing tactics can be volatile and unpredictable and no idea is guaranteed to work well. Marketing is a matter of meticulous research, assumptions, planning, and volatility at times. Overall we took away two major points: 1) that it is important to consider the product lifecycle in evaluating how to promote businesses and, 2) that the “Sweet Spot” as a competitive advantage should be the greatest point of consideration when evaluating how to best gain leverage to beat the competition in the minds of
In 2015, the pharmaceutical industry spent over 27 billion dollars on advertising. The two greatest components of this effort were promotional advertising and free medication sampling, which the pharmaceuticals invested 15.5 and 5.7 billion dollars respectively (“Persuading the Prescribers”). Promotional advertising involves direct contact with health professionals, the most common being extravagant lunch conferences held for physicians and their staff. On the other hand, sampling involves distributing free sample of medications to physicians, who then have a choice of providing these samples to patients. As a result of these methods, the industry has seen revenue around $400 billion with 90% of physicians having a relationship with a drug company (Campbell 2007). Moreover, the prices of prescriptions continue to rise; a copay of a generic drug is $11.72, preferred brand drug is $36.37 and a specialty drug is $58.37 (Coleman and Geneson 2014). Although the profits are immense in the numbers demonstrated above, it is no surprise when pharmaceutical drug companies elevate their prices even more. For instance, recently Turing Pharmaceuticals raised the price of their medication Daraprim from $13.50 to $750. Keep in mind, this medication is used for threatening parasitic infections, aids, and cancer with alternative options currently found to be inefficient (Pollack 2015). Another example of this practice involves cycloserine, a drug used to
The goal is to use a mass-market strategy. This will happen by ignoring any segment differences and design multiple product and marketing programs that will appeal to a very large number of potential customers (Mullins & Walker Jr, 2010). By doing this, the company will gain economies of scale and cost advantage. The plan is to be able to provide everyone from children to adults with something that will be cost effective while being able to help them. We are looking at providing for everyone that can take our medication.
The percent change in spending for heart disease was attributed to a 68.6% increase in cost per treated case and a 30.3% increase in the population treated. Heart disease spending was the largest among 15 medical conditions experiencing the largest rise in spending. Interestingly, the rise in cost per treated hypertension case accounted for 60% of the overall growth in spending for hypertension compared with a 19% rise in treated prevalence of the disease. This was attributed to the emergence of new and more costly antihypertensive drugs. In contrast, 50% of the rise in health care spending for diabetes was a result of a rise in treated prevalence and only 24% was attributed to an increased cost per treated case. The total spending for diabetes increased from $8.6 billion in 1987 to $18.28 billion in 2000. Spending for diabetes will surely rise exponentially in the next 10 years because of the continued increase in prevalence of the population being treated and an increased cost per case as new diabetic drugs enter the pharmacologic armamentarium. The spending for diabetes and the spending for heart disease are obviously intertwined.
The open heart surgeries are profitable to hospitals, and even though the market was declining, if the hospital could capture some of the profit from these procedures, it would enable them to continue to make a profit. The hospitals in this area were all in competition for the ability to offer these services (George, 2002).
Prescription drug prices are on the rise in the United States. Currently, the United States does not implement a price control on prescription drugs. Every day the supply and demand for prescription drugs fluctuates. Pharmaceutical companies produce drugs that are necessary for survival. Therefore, it is necessary for research and development to continue in the United States. Those suffering the effects of exorbitant prices must do so until a generic form of a prescription drug is produced. Once approved by the FDA, new drugs will make their appearance on the market and patients will no longer suffer financially. Until then, it is necessary for pharmaceutical companies to price their drugs based on the idea of supply and demand. This produces the profit used to fund research. Price controls discourage innovation. If a price control were set in place, of course the price of prescription drugs would decrease. However, the development of new drugs decreases with it. Today’s generation would benefit from lower prices, while future generations would suffer from the loss of drug innovation.
Recently, there had been a controversy over the rise in pharmaceutical costs involving the EpiPen in the United States. The EpiPen, also known as adrenaline/epinephrine, is a widely used injection that is used to treat allergic reactions. This generic drug has been available for many years. The EpiPen controversy is a prime example of how monopoly
The management team at the over-the-counter cold medicine (OCM) group of Allstar Brands is looking to utilize revenue generated by Allround to help fund new opportunities in emerging markets. Therefore, it is critical that Allround maintain its market-leading position in terms of market share, profitability, and sales in order to fund these new initiatives.
The rise in costs of prescription medicines affects all sectors of the health care industry, including private insurers, public programs, and patients. Spending on prescription drugs continues to be an important health care concern, particularly in light of rising pharmaceutical costs, the aging population, and increased use of costly specialty drugs. In recent history, increases in prescription drug costs have outpaced other categories of health care spending, rising rapidly throughout the latter half of the 1990s and early 2000s. (Kaiseredu.org, 2012).
Very High Risk patients = $8000*13.68% = $1088 (Heparin 21.4% - Angiomax 7.8% = 13.6%)
Recently, there has been a debate about the high prescription drug prices in the United States. Accounting for 9.7% of the national health expenditure, $329.2 billion was spent on prescription medications ($931 per person) in 2011 (Linton, 2014). So what exactly is the average American getting with their $931? Well, because there is an extraordinary amount of time, effort, and energy that goes into creating, manufacturing, and distributing a new drug, it’s no wonder the prices are so high. But what other costs are folded into the prices of your prescribed medications? This review looks beyond just the research and development costs needed to take a new drug from idea to shelf by examining several journals and other credible, secondary sources, to shed some light on how much pharmaceutical companies are spending to develop, advertise, and sell their drugs.
Angiomax has two categories of consumers, end users and buyers. As we mentioned above, the values Angiomax can deliver to end users are crucial to their health and life. According to “nine different types of effects influencing perceptions of value” in chapter 4 (P82-104), a couple of factors will affect end buyers price sensitivity. The first one is shared-cost effect. Since insurance covers a share of the drug cost, price sensitivity of end buyers will decrease. The second factor is end-benefit effect. Price proportion cost refers to the percent of the total cost of the end benefit accounted for by the product’s price. The smaller the proportionate share accounted for, the less sensitive the customer will be to the price
Marketing has become so prominent in health care today because the health care system is more and more resembling a business. There are many functions to be performed and many complex and sophisticated skills involved. There has been so much growth and competition that health care is advertised and marketed like any other product.
Cardiology Associates will be the cardiac facility of choice in the North East by focusing on patient care, staff development and continued adoption of new medical technology. We will continue to grow the practice’s significant financial contribution to the success of Southeastern Pennsylvania University Hospital through our focus on maximizing our efficiencies while supporting our patients by providing excellent care with the primary goal of becoming a fully paperless office by the year 2018. We will look to the future to anticipate the cutting edge opportunities to provide industry leading cardiac care to our patients with a keen focus on new and innovative technology.