A recent blog note about the growth of on-line continuing medical education (CME) for physicians caught my attention (see: Online CME Growth is Bad News for Pharma Marketers). For me, the note touches on three topics that are of great interest to me: (1) the future of CME; (2) the web as a vehicle for educating healthcare professionals; and (3) the reliance of some physicians on pharmaceutical companies as a major source for their information about the drugs that they prescribe. Below is an excerpt from the article (boldface emphasis mine):
It's very instructive to peruse ACCME's annual report data if you want to understand the trends in pharma support of physician continuing medical education (CME). ACCME stands for Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education.... Doctors need a certain amount of CME credits every year to maintain their licenses. The ACCME data includes information about the number of physician participants in CME programs, the CME hours delivered ....And it breaks this information down according to the type of CME provider ....Last year, the pharmaceutical industry provided $1.19 billion to sponsor CME programs ($1.44 billion if you include advertising and exhibits at CME events). Meanwhile, the number of physicians participating in online CME “events” has increased dramatically, especially in 2006 ....Approximately one quarter of physician participants in CME activities occur via the Internet....This is bad news for the pharmaceutical industry. Online CME is delivered mostly via physician Web sites like Medscape.....As far as pharmaceutical marketers are concerned, the more physicians that get CME credits online, the less likely they are to attend live events where collateral marketing can easily occur.
I consider the increasing interest by physicians in the web as a source for CME in a very positive light and as possibly a way to dilute the influence of Big Pharma on the choice of drugs by physicians. One reason for the increasing popularity of the web for CME activities, and my support for it, is that it's less expensive than presentations in live settings. The playing field is thus more level. Another reason is that it's easier for busy physicians to fit web-based CME activities into their busy days. Lastly, the web tends to provide broader access to a wide range of data and opinions for the learner. For example, information about the efficacy a particular drug or side effects based on research studies are usually only a click of two away. The Medscape CME offerings are free and the web site will even keep track of CME credits earned.
I need to emphasize that web-base CME will never be a total substitute for live speakers or conferences. This blog, Lab Soft News, has a companion conference, Lab InfoTech Summit, that provides an invaluable opportunity to hear lectures by a large set of faculty, view the product offerings of many vendors in the same room, and network with peers from around the country. However, it is important to avoid conference venues where sponsors or exhibitors control the messages that are delivered or where commercial bias is not clearly recognizable.
Comments