Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy
Volume 1, Issue 2 , Pages 310-330, June 2005

Introduction of direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs in Canada: An opinion survey on regulatory policy

  • Barbara Mintzes, Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, University of British Columbia (UBC), Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z3
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author.
  • ,
  • Morris Barer, M.B.A., Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, University of British Columbia (UBC), Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z3
    • Department of Health Care and Epidemiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z3
  • ,
  • Joel Lexchin, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • School of Health Policy & Management, Atkinson Faculty of Liberal and Professional Studies, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M3J 1P3
  • ,
  • Ken L. Bassett, M.D., Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Departments of Family Practice and Pharmacology & Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z3

Abstract 

Background

Canada is strongly influenced by US cross-border direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) and has held consultations to discuss introduction of DTCA since 1996. This article describes a survey of Canadian drug policy experts carried out in 2001, during one such legislative review. The survey results are compared to more recent DTCA policy developments.

Methods

We recruited key informants on pharmaceutical policy to complete a faxed questionnaire that queried their opinions on DTCA information quality, effects on drug and health care use, and regulatory issues. Respondents were asked about the evidence they had used to back their opinions. Analysis was descriptive.

Results and discussion

Of 79 identified potential participants, 60 (76%) participated, 40% of whom were from federal and provincial government; 3% were private insurers; 18%, 15%, and 8% were from health professional groups, consumer groups, and patient groups, respectively; 8% and 7% were from pharmaceutical and advertising industries, respectively. Opinions were highly polarized on the effects of DTCA on drug and health care use. Advertising and pharmaceutical industry respondents were generally positive, public sector, health professional and consumer groups generally negative. Over 80% believed DTCA leads to higher private and public drug costs and more frequent physician visits. Fewer judged billboards or television to be appropriate media for DTCA than magazines or the Internet, and most believed that children and adolescents should not be targeted.

Conclusion

Given the polarization observed within this survey, we examined how DTCA policy has evolved in Canada since 2001. The federal government has legislative authority over DTCA, but bears few of the additional costs potentially incurred through policy change. These fall to the provinces, which provide an eroding patchwork of public coverage for prescription drugs in the face of rapidly increasing costs. No new federal legislation has been tabled since 2001. However, considerable shifts in administrative policy have occurred, all supportive of expanded advertising. Thus, the law continues to be restrictive but its application less so.

Keywords: Direct-to-consumer advertising, Prescription drugs, Drug regulation, Canada, Key informant survey

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 25.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1551-7411(05)00039-2

doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2005.03.007

Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy
Volume 1, Issue 2 , Pages 310-330, June 2005