Archive for July, 2008

23
Jul

Where have all the endocrinologists gone?

I’ve mentioned diabetes guru Kelly Close before. Kelly is the founder of Close Concerns, a healthcare information company based in San Francisco, CA, that is exclusively focused on diabetes and obesity. Close Concerns publishes resources for both industry (Diabetes Close Up and Closer Look) and consumers (diaTribe).

Kelly forwarded a copy of the report that she and her team wrote analyzing the CDC’s (Center for Disease Control) June update on diabetes statistics. (She sent it to me in June, I’m just now writing about it. Mea culpa!) Among the most dramatic news was the new estimate of 57 million people in the US over the age of 20 with pre-diabetes. Other notable findings:

  • Estimates of the total number of people with diabetes nationwide (diagnosed and undiagnosed) have risen to 23.6 million in 2007 from 20.8 million people in 2005.
  • As a percentage of the population, the number of people diagnosed with diabetes has grown to nearly 8%. This represents 11% growth since 2005 and 24% growth since 2002.
  • People with diabetes are being better diagnosed. Since 2002, there has been a 37% increase in diagnosed patients, a 10% decrease in undiagnosed patients, and a 30% increase in the number of patients overall.
  • The direct cost of diabetes was estimated at $116 billion for 2007. Including indirect costs such as lost productivity; this cost nears $175 billion.

Shortly afterwards, Kelly sent me a PDF of the poster she and several others presented at the ADA (American Diabetes Association) Scientific Sessions in June called, “Who Will Manage American Patients with Diabetes in the Near Future?” I had no idea what a grave situation is unfolding in our medical system related to diabetes care.

Previous work has estimated that the US has a 12–15% undersupply of endocrinologists, with this shortage predicted to expand to 25–30% by 2020. Fewer than 3000 endocrinologists practice in the US, while approximately 3000 patients are diagnosed with diabetes daily. The aim of this study*, therefore, was to identify factors that are deterring students from specializing in diabetes care, and to understand what can be done to reverse this trend.

The results are astounding. Out of the 524 medical students surveyed as part of the study, only seven students (1.3%) expressed an interest in endocrinology, and only three of those students were interested in pursuing diabetes care.

What is driving this? Students cited the uphill battle of modifying patient behavior as the #1 reason (46%) they are eschewing diabetes. Second was a general lack of interest in the field (42%) and third was lack of procedures (38%). Surprisingly (at least to me), inadequate compensation did not make the top three; it came in fourth place at 35%. When choosing a specialty, the vast majority of medical students indicate that they are concerned primarily with the intellectual satisfaction of the work; compensation and length of training were not cited as major concerns.

So just as the incidence of diabetes is increasing, there will be fewer specialists available to diagnose, treat, monitor and educate these patients. The job will fall to already burdened PCP’s and to the patients themselves. Why should pharma care? Because it’s not clear who is going to take the time to learn about all the new medications in the pipeline let alone prescribe them.

Who Will Manage American Patients with Diabetes in the Near Future?

Who Will Manage American Patients with Diabetes in the Near Future?

The study’s authors conclude that increasing physician interest in diabetes will require significant changes to reimbursement structure and physician economics. They also note that new and improved therapies may increase interest in diabetes care if they are able to provide real alternatives to behavior modification.

* Study methodology
Between April and August of 2007, the authors conducted an electronic survey of 524 medical students and inquired about their exposure to diabetes in medical school, their interest in pursuing diabetes care, and the attributes of a specialty that they consider to be most important. Survey respondents represented all four years of medical school, with a small bias toward first year (first: 39%; second: 23%; third: 12%; fourth: 26%).

16
Jul

J & J on YouTube

Finally! We have a real-world example of how pharma can engage with social media. Last week, J&J launched a health channel on YouTube featuring short videos on a range of health topics. NBC’s chief medical guru Nancy Snyderman used to work at J&J and created many of the videos that will appear on the site. J&J spokesman Marc Monseau, who also blogs at JNJBTW, commented, “There had been a number of videos produced when Nancy worked in our corporate communications office. We were tasked with figuring out how to use these, and we realized that they would be very useful online.”

You TubeSo they chose YouTube, which I think is a wise move. Go where the action is. With 80 million users, YouTube is a major destination and information hub. Plus, every imaginable (and some you’d never imagine) health topic already exists on YouTube in video form. I’ve used it to learn about conditions and love hearing from real people about their experiences. J&J’s videos will clearly be different - better quality, expert-led (via Dr. Snyderman) opinion pieces - but I suspect they’ll find an audience.

J&J was among the first healthcare companies to create a corporate blog - JNJBTW (mentioned above). They seem genuinely interested in engaging health consumers online. I was a bit surprised at the topic they chose for their YouTube debut: teenage gastric bypass surgery and related obesity. Not that it’s a bad topic, just not very J&J (IMHO). Nevertheless, it’s a start. Good for you, J&J.

03
Jul

Taking the Pulse of physicians

This is for the data junkies, of which I am one. Manhattan Research publishes many studies about online behavior in healthcare. They recently released Taking the Pulse® v8.0, a study of online trends among physicians in the U.S. In conjunction with this, they produced a half-hour Web cast to go through some key findings. I also got in touch with MR and secured some additional info and charts/graphs. Some key take-aways are below.

The Internet is completely integrated into physicians’ personal and professional lives.
Physicians go online during the day, between patient visits or during patient consults to search for information. Just a few years ago, one could only reach physicians online at night or on weekends.

  • 99% of physicians are online for personal or professional purposes
  • 85% of offices have broadband
  • 83% consider the Internet essential to their practice

Physicians are turning to the web and their Blackberrys for clinical information.

They are increasingly using them to replace physical sources such as journals, textbooks, drug references and conferences.

  • 54% own a PDA/smartphone
  • Survey found a 15% attendance drop over the past three years at major conferences; doctors can watch or download the presentations online
  • Primary care physicians are more likely than average physicians to use a drug reference database
  • Google is the search engine of choice with 91% using it for medical and pharmaceutical queries
  • Corporate pharma sites are not information destinations

Social networks targeted at physicians are growing in acceptance and becoming centers of influence.

  • Sermo was first to market but many others are getting in the game (see my post: Physicians continue to get social)
  • Physicians who participate in social networks today tend to be PCP’s, female physicians and slightly younger than the average doctor
  • Some older physicians are beginning to post and share their wisdom. They have the potential to be exponentially valuable in terms of the voice they’re going to gain in the coming years.

An area where physicians are also interested in using the web is for customer service with pharma. However, the study found that the use of customer service portals actually decreased between 2007 and 2008. This is likely because physicians are consumers, too, and have certain expectations of these sites. They have not found the content to be sophisticated or the tools robust. They’d love to have access to live reps and better resources for their patients. An example of one company getting it right is Merck with its MerckServices site.

01
Jul

Consumer Reports targets health

Consumer Reports Health promised me they’d rate my prescription drugs “with the same expertise and independence [they] use to rate cars, electronics and appliances.” Who could resist an offer like that? I’ve been pretty happy with our GE fridge for about 10 years so I signed up. The initial email touted a $5 annual subscription, but by the time I got around to visiting the site it had gone up to $19. Still that’s not too much for a site that “provides objective, evidence-based Ratings for medical treatments, drugs and natural medicines.”

I searched for the drugs my family takes but came away disappointed. CRH does not rate Rx drugs, rather they provide information like why a drug is prescribed, its side effects, and how to use it. While CRH posts that they do not rely on drug package inserts and manufacturer claims and instead use info provided by the American Society of Health-Systems Pharmacists, there is nothing here that I couldn’t find on a public, non-fee site. I then went looking under Conditions & Treatments for specific topics. The current list of topics is small, much more so than what I’ve seen on sites like OrganizedWisdom, which is free.

Still I’ll give them a chance now that I’ve forked over my 19 bucks. Their Healthy Living section seems more robust, which makes sense since they are at heart a consumer organization, not a clinical one. They have also announced plans to launch a hospital ratings service. According to the email, it will rate about 3,000 U.S. hospitals on the intensity of care for nine serious medical conditions.