The "The Corporate Reputation of Pharma in 2019 - The Patient Perspective - UK Edition - The Views of 89 UK Patient Groups" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.
This is the 8th edition of the report series. The 2019 results are drawn from a survey of UK patient groups, conducted November 2019 - February 2020.
About the 2019 Survey of UK Patient Groups
2019's 89 respondent UK patient groups specialised in 48 different therapy areas.
The 89 UK patient groups had the following geographic remits: 63% had a national geographic remit; 15% an international remit; 7% regional (an area within the UK); and 15% were local.
On UK Patient-Group Relationships with Pharma
56% of the 89 UK patient groups responding to the 2019 survey worked with at least one pharma company.
What this Report Contains
Industry-wide analyses: The report examines the issues of importance to UK patient groups, including: levels of industry innovation; access to treatments; transparency of the industry; and drug pricing. Analyses are reinforced by extensive feedback from 2019's respondent UK patient groups, classified in a 14-page Appendix according to the specialties of the respondent patient groups.
Individual company analyses: The 16 pharma companies are reviewed by 2019's 89 respondent UK patient groups for overall corporate reputation, and for performance at 12 individual indicators of corporate reputation.
Key Industry-Wide Findings
Since 2012, when this analysis was first undertaken, UK patient groups have consistently reported lower approval ratings of the pharma industry than patient groups worldwide. However, the percentage of respondent UK patient groups believing the pharma industry's corporate reputation to be Excellent or Good increased from 2018 (28%) to 2019 (33%).
On transparency: 'The Corporate-Reputation' survey asks respondent patient groups to consider the pharma industry's record of transparency in three subject areas: pricing issues; sharing of clinical data; and funding of external stakeholders (such as doctors). Only 22% or less of 2019's respondent UK patient groups stated that the pharmaceutical industry was Excellent or Good at any of the three types of transparency. Comments made to the survey by respondent UK patient groups reveal that, often, the issue for them was not a failure by industry to be transparent, but more, the industry's poor levels of communication. As a national patient group specialising in atopic dermatitis/eczema stated: Make clear any funding or partnership arrangements on the company's website, and for information to be found easily. Similarly, CCL Support said: Publish information about funding on their website, and the results of all trials with their drugs.
On pricing: From the data collected, and feedback received from the respondent UK patient groups, pricing remained an area of dissatisfaction in 2019. As one national patient group specialising in kidney conditions told the survey: Ensure that the price enables the National Health Service (NHS) to purchase their products - that is, price the products to make them cost-effective. Just 8% of the 89 respondent UK patient groups judged the industry to be Excellent or Good at having fair pricing policies in 2019.
On patient engagement in R&D: 2019's respondent UK patient groups, as in previous years, were clear that not only do they want companies to offer transparent and timely access to clinical-trial data but also that these patient groups wish to be involved throughout the drug research-and-development process. One national patient group specialising in skin disorders noted: Work more closely with patient groups, so that the pharma company understands the real needs of patients, and contributes directly to improving their lives, alongside the development of new drugs.
Key Company Findings
Janssen and Gilead continued to dominate the UK league tables for 2019. Two companies, Sanofi and Boehringer Ingelheim, made large jumps up the UK league tables, 2018-2019.
Ranked 1st: Janssen was ranked overall 1st out of 16 companies for corporate reputation in 2019 by the 30 respondent UK patient groups familiar with the company. In 2018, Janssen was ranked 2nd out of 19 companies by the UK patient groups familiar with it.
Ranked 2nd: Gilead was ranked overall 2nd out of 16 companies for corporate reputation in 2019 by the 24 respondent UK patient groups familiar with the company. In 2018, Gilead was ranked 1st out of 19 companies by the UK patient groups familiar with it.
Ranked 3rd: Sanofi was ranked overall 3rd out of 16 companies for corporate reputation in 2019 by the 33 respondent UK patient groups familiar with the company. In 2018, Sanofi was ranked 9th out of 19 companies by the UK patient groups familiar with it.
Ranked 4th: Boehringer Ingelheim was ranked overall 4th out of 16 companies for corporate reputation in 2019 by the 27 respondent UK patient groups familiar with the company. In 2018, Boehringer was ranked 17th out of 19 companies by the UK patient groups familiar with it.
A majority of the 89 UK patient groups responding to the 2019 Corporate-Reputation' survey felt unable to pick out any one company as Best at:
ensuring patient safety;
providing services beyond the pill', or at
engaging patients in R&D.
However, these UK results are in general conformity with the opinions of 2019's 1,850 respondent patient groups from all countries.
A note about COVID-19 and this study's results
Covid-19 should have a relatively limited impact on many of the results of the 2019 Corporate-Reputation' study, because the survey took place (November 2019 to late-February 2020) largely before the crisis became global. However, announcements about Covid-19 by some pharma companies during January and February 2020, may have influenced the views of patient groups responding to the Corporate-Reputation' survey during its last two months.
Key Topics Covered
UK patient-group relationships with pharma, 2019
Industry-wide findings, 2019
Rankings of 16 pharma companies, 2019 (v. 2018) among UK patient groups familiar with the companies
Profiles of the 16 companies, 2019 (v. 2018)
Profiles of the 16 companies, 2019 v. 2018, Charts and Tables
Number of respondent UK patient groups claiming familiarity with the company, 2019.
Number of respondent UK patient groups saying that they had a working relationship with the company, 2019.
Profile of respondent UK patient groups familiar with the company, 2019: country headquarters; specialties; geographic remit; and types of relationships.
Company scores among respondent UK patient groups familiar with the company, and which work with the company, for each of the 12 indicators of corporate reputation, 2019.
Percentage of the respondent UK patient groups that work with the company, but which also works with other companies, 2019.
Overall rankings for the company, according to respondent UK patient groups familiar with the company, 2019 v. 2018.
Company rankings for each of the 12 indicators, according to respondent UK patient groups familiar with the company, 2019 v. 2018.
Snapshot view: where the company sits in the corporate tiers for each of the 12 indicators (in the higher, the middle, or the lower tier), as assessed by respondent UK patient groups familiar with the company, 2019.
The company's Patient Corporate Reputation Indexes (PCRIs), 2015-2019 - selected indicators.
Bristol Myers Squibb
Gilead Sciences/Kite Pharma
Merck & Co/MSD
For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/8yq16z
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200812005328/en/
Laura Wood, Senior Press Manager
For E.S.T Office Hours Call 1-917-300-0470
For U.S./CAN Toll Free Call 1-800-526-8630
For GMT Office Hours Call +353-1-416-8900