Pharma's Future Role in CME
Over the last 10 years, every aspect of continuing medical education (CME) has endured major changes, forcing several pharmaceutical companies to reassess their future position in this important industry sector. Consider these facts:
So what role could or should the pharmaceutical industry play in medical education for healthcare professionals? And what should it expect in return for its investments? Find out in one convenient, compelling new FirstWord Dossier report: Pharma’s Future Role in CME.
REPORT OVERVIEW
Save time and effort by reviewing forecasts from 10 leading figures in the US and European CME fields. In this report, they analyse the emerging trends, radical changes, and major risks affecting future medical education. These opinion leaders also examine whether it would be better for the industry to take a leading role in future CME productions, or strategically direct these from the background.
KEY REPORT FEATURES
This report will be of value to pharma directors and managers with responsibilities in the following areas:
This report also will be of value to medical device companies, as well as medical education and clinical communications agencies.
EXPERT VIEWS INCLUDE:
- Pharma company financial support for CME in the US has fallen for the fourth year in a row: from $1.2 billion in 2007 to $736 million in 2011
- To minimise CME risks, many large pharma companies have stopped funding CME projects executed by commercial providers, and others are following suit
- Outside the US, an increasing number of pharma companies are now aligning their investments with independent medical education (IME)
- Stricter CME guidelines in the US and Europe are prompting more companies to hand over budgetary control to regulatory teams
So what role could or should the pharmaceutical industry play in medical education for healthcare professionals? And what should it expect in return for its investments? Find out in one convenient, compelling new FirstWord Dossier report: Pharma’s Future Role in CME.
REPORT OVERVIEW
Save time and effort by reviewing forecasts from 10 leading figures in the US and European CME fields. In this report, they analyse the emerging trends, radical changes, and major risks affecting future medical education. These opinion leaders also examine whether it would be better for the industry to take a leading role in future CME productions, or strategically direct these from the background.
KEY REPORT FEATURES
- Recent and expected US and European CME regulations
- Latest pharma approaches to minimising risk in CME
- Growing use of independent medical education (IME)
- Comparative differences between CME vs IME
- Potential effects of CME funding from other providers
- Key factors affecting future pharma investment in CME
- Opportunities in eCME and online medical education
- Internal pharma company changes for managing CME
- Understand the issues affecting CME in US and Europe
- Review your future CME, IME and eCME options
- Assess other medical education funding sources
- Evaluate the quality and efficacy of your CME content
- Explore the benefits of eCME for physicians and pharma
- Identify your company’s ultimate goal for CME programs
- Start planning your next medical education strategies
- Improve your potential medical education outcomes
- What are the primary factors affecting US and European CME?
- How are medical education providers having to adapt?
- Should physicians be responsible for funding their own CME?
- What are the key differences between CME and IME?
- What ROI can pharma expect from IME investments?
- Could eCME take over from face-to-face CME?
- Who should be managing internal pharma CME budgets?
- What do physicians think about the quality of CME content?
This report will be of value to pharma directors and managers with responsibilities in the following areas:
- Market access
- Continuing medical education
- Regulatory affairs
- Medical affairs
- Marketing management
- Business development
- Brand marketing
- Key Opinion Leader liaison
- Corporate communications
This report also will be of value to medical device companies, as well as medical education and clinical communications agencies.
EXPERT VIEWS INCLUDE:
- Dr Brendan Barnes, director, European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), Brussels, Belgium
- Dr Pim Kon, UK medical director, GlaxoSmithKline, UK
- David Noble, global head, PeerVoice, UK
- Prof Stephen Bain, Professor of Medicine (Diabetes) at Swansea University, UK
- Eugene Pozniak, programme director, European CME Forum (ECF), Manchester, UK
- Dr Bernard Maillet, treasurer to the VBS-GBS (Belgian Professional Association of Medical Specialists), Antwerp, Belgium
- Maureen Doyle-Scharff, senior director, Medical Education Group, Pfizer, Columbus, Ohio, US
- Dr Robin Stevenson, editor-in-chief, Journal of European CME, and Professor of Medicine, University of Glasgow, UK
- Medical education manager at a leading pharmaceutical company
- President of a major US based medical education company
- “I hope that we will find how to have similar rules all over the world. The big problem nowadays is that you have different rules in the US, in Canada, in Europe, in different Member States. It makes it very difficult because how can you comply with all the legislations?” Dr Bernard Maillet, treasurer, VBS-GBS
- “Everyone should take a long hard look at the dollars they're investing in CME, and why they're investing it. If their answer is to sell more products then they shouldn’t be in it. If their answer is to improve patient care then they’re in the right place,” Maureen Doyle-Scharff, Senior Director, Medical Education Group, Pfizer
- “Currently several pharmaceutical companies are aligning themselves to IME education. Some companies are grouping CME and IME together,” David Noble, Global Head, PeerVoice
- “The absolute critical thing that must happen with pharma is the budgets for CME must be taken away from marketing. The top 10 pharma companies are set up to hand over money from the marketing department to [regulations and legal departments],” Eugene Pozniak, programme director, European CME Forum
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
INDUSTRY PUSHED TOWARDS THE SIDE-LINES
CONCLUSIONS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
INTRODUCTION
INDUSTRY PUSHED TOWARDS THE SIDE-LINES
- From dark days to Sunshine Act
- Minimising risk is the new priority
- Europe following the US model
- European disunion?
- The push for new European guidelines
- Crossing borders
- Increased risk, reduced funding
- Collaborative approaches in CME
- Other potential sources of funding
- Should physicians be responsible for their own medical education?
- Evaluating IME vs CME
- So what are the differences between CME and IME?
- Regulating IME
- Industry involvement in IME
- How medical education providers are having to adapt?
- The grants system: Help or hindrance?
- The logistical challenge
- What is the ROI for industry?
- Improving patient outcomes
- Internal structures altering
- Is the quality of CME improving?
- The benefits of e-learning
CONCLUSIONS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
