Direct-to-Consumer Advertising Takes Hold in Orthopedics | EDITORIAL |
BY JOHN CHOPACK, JANUARY 24, 2005
Direct-to-consumer advertising has become the most powerful means of marketing pharmaceuticals over the last decade. For years we have seen these strange advertisements which typically only mention the name of a drug and the manufacturer, but withhold any information regarding what ailment the drug treats. This was a consequence of restrictions put in place by the FDA approximately 8 years ago. Even with the limited amount of information provided in these advertisements, pharmaceutical sales have soared as a consequence.
In most circumstances the consumer within the pharmaceutical market is clear; the patient typically pays a good portion of their drug costs out of their own pocket. In orthopedics, the case is quite different. Who actually holds the purchasing power within the orthopedic sector? For years orthopedic manufacturers have targeted the surgeon as the principle decision maker. Although the surgeon is critical in orthopedic marketing, if we think about it, the surgeon neither pays for the implant nor does he have to live with it. In most circumstances the hospital ends up paying a substantial portion of implant costs, but their buying decision is typically based solely on cost. An orthopedic manufacturer marketing an innovative technology to either of these aforementioned groups runs a good chance of their pitch falling on deaf ears. However, a patient that is debating on a total hip, total knee or spinal implant is bound to pay attention.
As a consequence of economic scale (the pharmaceutical is approximately $315 billion versus the $20 billion orthopedic market) the orthopedic device sector was limited in its ability to market directly to the consumer. However, beginning in 2003 this all changed when Stryker Corp. launched its Jack Nicholas Trident ceramic-on-ceramic hip television and print advertisement campaign. Since then, DePuy has begun to air its television spot for its mobile bearing knee and Biomet has run TV advertisements in selected regions including Pittsburgh, Louisville, Ohio and Texas. Others, including Zimmer, have launched direct-to-consumer print advertisements targeting potential patients. A majority of these advertisements are used to attract consumers to their respected websites which are geared toward patient education. In fact, Zimmer and Biomet have launched new websites which first ask if you are a patient, surgeon or investor and then take the visitor to a separate site geared for the answer provided. DePuy has launched several websites for patients describing specific products including mobile bearing knees and the Agility ankle.
Although I am unaware of the specific return on investment of these DTC campaigns, I can say I have noticed a significant difference in patient education since first my first involvement in orthopedics in 1997. During my first couple of years working as a sales representative rarely was I approached by a potential patient who had questions regarding a specific procedure or implant. Over the previous two years, an increasingly amount of individuals have asked me about orthopedic treatments once they realize I am involved in the sector. These questions haven't been "what is a hip or knee replacement?" but rather "what do you think of Zimmer's MIS hip procedure?" or "is Stryker's ceramic hip better than Biomet's metal implant?". I have even had one potential patient ask me to help him get involved with a specific manufacturer's IDE trial.
While some critics have expressed that medical/pharmaceutical DTC advertising is purely raising overall healthcare costs as companies seek to capture the costs of these campaigns in product price increases, I disagree. The best method of ensuring consumer satisfaction is to incorporate them in the decision making process. Why should this be different in healthcare? Why should it be more accepted to educate an individual about his/her car than a product that will be implanted within them for the rest of their life?
I applaud the orthopedic sector for spending the money to educate the patient by using direct-to-consumer advertising and I expect it to increase in the future. Although investor returns as a consequence of such marketing tactics are hard to quantify, it is likely that these tactics will dramatically alter the future of the orthopedic sector including demand for higher priced implants, demand for surgeons trained in the latest techniques, surgeon awareness, private payment for orthopedic procedures and pricing.
