New research shows that SME growth provides the best prospect for economic recovery in the UK. But, as private equity firm ECI notes, finding the cash to reach out to global partners and markets can be a critical hurdle.

With continued pressure on governments across the Western world to reduce their expenditure, together with sustained macro-economic uncertainty and a tightening of bank funding, times are not necessarily easy for the average healthcare company – which often relies on the public purse for reimbursement and debt funding for growth. One might therefore expect the short-term outlook for growth to be somewhat muted, despite the backdrop of positive longer-term demographic drivers of demand.

Hence it is interesting that a recent survey of UK SME businesses by ECI Partners, a UK-based midmarket private equity firm, has found executives to be generally positive about growth prospects over the next 12 months, with 74% of respondents anticipating headcount growth and 60% expecting double-digit turnover growth.

The results met with a warm response from the Government, with Mark Prisk, Minister of State for Business and Enterprise, saying: “It’s good news that despite a tough few months, nearly three-quarters of the SMEs surveyed by ECI are looking to recruit over the next year and half expect to see substantial profit growth in that period. Up and down the country, it is Britain’s SMEs that are driving our economic recovery.”

Reaching out

This year, the survey conducted each summer by ECI Partners gained responses from a total of 246 chief executives from UK growth companies from a range of sectors with turnover between £10m and £200m. The results paint a positive picture against the gloomy economic backdrop of the Eurozone crisis and sluggish UK economy, and suggest that there remains growth potential amongst SME businesses – which account for around a third of UK private sector employment.

Steve Tudge, a Managing Director of ECI, commented: “Despite the barriers to growth, which are principally cited as a weaker macro-environment and funding constraints, we continue to be optimistic about the prospects for good mid-market companies.”

Executives see the key growth drivers to be increasing international sales – with Europe and the USA remaining the dominant international markets, though India and China are becoming more important – and organic growth through investment in sales and marketing and new product development. Over 40% of companies are also planning to increase their use of overseas suppliers to improve their margins.

Internal cash flows are viewed as the most likely source of funding for this growth, though around half of respondents say they are likely to seek bank debt within the next 12 months (despite continued complaints about its cost and due diligence requirements) and around 40% are also likely to look at private equity backing. Fewer than 10% of companies see the public markets as accessible, perhaps reflecting the recent volatility and liquidity issues associated with the AIM market.

Healthcare respondents are less bullish about high growth than their peers in other sectors, and are noticeably less positive about growth than they were last year. This no doubt reflects, in part, the political uncertainty surrounding the current UK healthcare reforms and the public sector spending constraints that are impacting on the health and social care sectors.

Despite this, companies remain more confident of raising growth financing – and of raising it from private equity firms, with over 50% saying that was a likely consideration over the next year.

Financing growth

What does all this mean for SME healthcare businesses in the UK? The sector certainly faces challenges in responding to Government spending cuts, which are tending to put pressure on margins if not always on volumes.

However, opportunities for growth remain amidst these challenges, particularly for companies who are able and willing to venture beyond the UK in order to seek new customers and cheaper suppliers.

Of course, this internationalisation can put a strain on smaller businesses, which may lack the scale to fully support an international infrastructure. Private equity groups with experience and expertise in this process can potentially offer support to management teams in this position – whether by making introductions, sharing best practice or simply financing the required infrastructure.

There are significant sums of capital available for investment from the UK private equity industry, and there remains an appetite to invest in market-leading healthcare businesses. Thus private equity should be considered seriously as an option by management teams in the healthcare industry who are looking to fund growth to help their companies succeed in the current economic environment.

ECI is a private equity group that has been investing in mid-market growth businesses for over 35 years. It invests across sectors, with a focus on UK and Irish companies. Healthcare companies in its current portfolio include a primary care provider (Harmoni), assisted living specialists (Premier Bathrooms, DLP) and medical software companies (Clinisys, Ascribe).

How well do you understand the various priorities of a key element of your customer-base: the payer? Omar Ali pens Part II of a typical day in the life of a Formulary Pharmacist.

10AM : GP REFUSED PRESCRIBING OF A PAIN DRUG/ACTION ASAP
OK, we have been here before – this product is non-formulary. It has never been applied for. The GP is well within rights to refuse prescribing. The consultant knows it is non-formulary and has ‘requested’ via a letter – actually stating it is non-formulary, so would the GP kindly prescribe it.

The GP is irate, and the patient is now confused and unhappy: “why wont you prescribe what the expert/consultant has asked for?” There is a stalemate. Not a great scenario – this call is backed up with emails going back with two PCT advisers, a commissioner, a GP and a pain nurse. This will mean going to see the consultant and being firm: these are the rules of engagement, this is the financial framework, this is how I can help you manage your patient.

Thoughts for pharma

We call this ‘lockdown’. It’s a process by which redundancy is built into the formulary processes to ensure compliance, limited loopholes and consequential policing. What’s crazy is I know the brand, and I know the rep. Every month she asks: “when is the next D&T?” I tell her – and nothing happens. Next month, she asks again. So what’s happening?

The representative knows she needs a consultant to bring her brand to the D&T but can’t/won’t affect it. The representative then considers ways around the D&T; KOL to find loopholes, write to the GP, prescribe on FP10(HP), do a non-formulary request, try IFR, etc. In fact, exhaust all opportunities except the one that is needed: D&T approval.

Sometimes the pharma company has a brand philosophy which doesn’t press the right buttons: they have representatives calling the wrong people, the quality of the representative is not good enough, the seniority/decision-making-abilities are lacking.

This ‘lockdown’ effect will usually mean that the company goes round in circles. It focuses on new materials and a wonderfully articulated campaign – usually around ‘Edith’, a 50-year-old patient who is suffering from constipation and can’t enjoy her grandchildren. “If only you would prescribe the brand for her. You would if it was your own grandmother”.

The ‘payer avoidance’ strategy will not work. Lockdown is getting tighter. With Clinical Commissioning Groups it will be even more so. The financial framework will be more akin to trying to prescribe a non-formulary drug whilst working for BUPA, who would neither tolerate nor reimburse because the formulary is under a financial restrictions.

Indeed, the pain market has also intensified. This means numerous brands shouting for a louder voice in an intense market. Neuropathy, Opioids, Fentanyl/breakthrough Ca pain – add these up and you have pharma running around competing for a slice of the pie. Given all the warnings we had with COX-IIs, now we have them with NSAIDS, and of course even the weak Opioids have ‘addictive warnings’ all over them.

It is not surprising we are caught in the headlights of where to go in the name of safety and analgesia. Please someone, be it a brand manager or someone with payer access, see the bigger picture. Help us with the whole pathway. See our needs and work in partnership with us.

11AM : MEETING WITH PHARMA BRAND MANAGER
It’s not often I get a visit from a brand manager! We have been struggling for some time attempting to commission a funding pathway for an osteoporosis product – see earlier Matrix Revolutions. However, we may have a solution now with a variety of process mapping models.

I have finally received a number of options and interestingly the applicable HRG codes for activity within this domain. This has been a headache, despite a NICE TAG within the context of this ongoing saga. A resolution is long overdue. After a lot of liaising and a lot of technical HRG work-up, we may end up up with a streamlined prescribing pathway which lines up the PCT, the GPC, the acute trust, and fracture liaison service.

Thoughts for pharma

There is an intriguing change of paradigm when I am sat having an adult conversation with a brand manager compared to a ‘rep-call’. I realise that brand managers can’t go and see all their customers face-to-face.

But the paradigm shift is palpable. Why? Here we have it: The representative is ‘detailing me’ – that is never going to compare with an adult conversation with a brand manager who gets the bigger picture.

But something else, potentially more devastating: the brand manager is able to vocalise the ‘brand story’ in a far more compelling way than the ‘local rep’. That’s interesting, because the local rep is trained in the ‘brand messages’.

Even if you put aside that the brand manager has a ‘big picture understanding’, the fact that the value of the brand was unbelievably clear means that somewhere along the factory chain of sales force effectiveness and tier upon tier of managers, the message is lost in Chinese whispers. Why? I don’t actually know.

The representatives that are sent to see me are not in the same locator of food chain as I am. In effect, pharma is sending people of a certain authority that doesn’t fit with where I am. Even with account management. Remember, I talk clinical, I talk financial, I do commissioning maps, I do total drug budgets – I still have a boss.

However, pharma send people to see me with the following authority: “I need to get my medic to answer that…I need to get my line-manager to answer that…I need to call in my health economics person to see you…I need to call my regional account manager to approve that…”

When will I see all these people? Why do I need to see them all? Is it all ABPI, is it internal compliance, or is it sales force design? I’m not all for it, but I do see where some industry leaders are coming from in proposing authorised account managers answerable to MDs with budgets run at their own liability and expertise.

I recently did a ‘Payer Process Mapping Day’ for a pharma company/team of Executive Healthcare Development Managers. It fascinated me. Pharma has spoon-fed even higher NHS teams to such a level, that if you clear the playing field and ask them to come up with solutions to landscapes, they go blank. at day, the summarising  suggestions was simply: “we need a toolkit from head-office”. It was worrying. My conclusion?

We need to innovate within the NHS. Pharma companies are stakeholders. We should be asking you to help us innovate, but the people you are sending me… while I’m wanting them to look at the traffic jams I have ahead of me, and help navigate local influencing factors, they are waiting for a tool-kit from head-office!

11.30AM : CARDIOLOGY CONSULTANTS FORUM
Cardiology prescribing has so many focal features right now, I’m struggling to keep up with payer issues. This is due to a mixture of NHS demands, D&T processes, a sizable shift in coronary intervention work – and the drugs required within such units) and recent launches of new products that are proving challenging to implement within our health economy.

The format takes place as follows: I basically ‘gatecrash’ the forum and hijack a section of the agenda to use the opportunity for both information flow – in both directions, buy-in – to various prescribing initiatives, D&T processes and budgetary issues, and input to a number of shared-care-prescribing guidelines.

The aim is to open GPC/CCG cluster prescribing. A lot of this is about supportive communications; managing up – to my Chief and Director of Finance, and managing down – to pharmacy team on formulary policing. I need to take the consultants from ‘one place to another place’ within each micro-managed sub therapy. It’s a give-and-take scenario.

Thoughts for pharma

Cardiology has never really left the ‘priorities’ list. Right now, although there are some exciting and challenging implementations, I foresee a rocky road ahead. Antiplatelets. With the onset of generic clopidogrel’s price suddenly dropping like a stone – Plavix was £40 pcm, generic clopidogrel is now £2.50pcm, the Director of Finance is looking at the cost savings that we have built into our financial planning.

But here’s the catch – not only do we have branded prasugrel, we also now have branded ticagrelor, both pushing upward of £50pcm+. So how do we manage this? I have potential new pipleline antiplatelets which have offerings to interventional cardiology versus a savings plan that I will need to explain if I renege on. Tough. After much consternation, we’d put prasugrel onto our formulary, and now we have displaced this with ticagrelor.

We still have the generic clopidogrel as first line – but we always, always need a second line drug. Interestingly, neither company appears to have come forward with a QIPP line yet. One of them have thought about patient access schemes. NICE looks like it will be happy to support either. Cardiac networks play an important role – the cardiologists just want somewhere else to go after generic failure.

This was a learning curve for me. Whilst the clinical ‘story’ for either brand never really did magical wonders for the payers, the cardiac network is influential, and I think the companies are now maybe reconciling a ‘payer value story’.

There was a scary moment for one of the companies – a serious hospital discount nearly had us giving away one of the brands as a 12-month supply on the rucksack of a patient discharged from the angio suite – with a cost-saving share with the PCT. The company in question quickly made that disappear! It’s fascinating and like a game of chess sometimes…

Dronedarone. Even with a NICE TAG behind it, this has not been easy to implement. It really does take some serious ‘heads-together’ and I have never seen such fierce debate between clinicians and payers. Affordability and the increasing prevalence of AF makes for a great D&T discussion.

The next meeting I have with the directorate is to implement the use of this agent in young patients – outside NICE who recommended in 75yr+ – as the clinicians see greatest benefit here. This is where the payer’s approach needs serious consideration. All being well, I’ve managed to create an amber/shared care with PCT funding to keep all happy – let’s see what happens at the formalisation and authorisation meeting.

NICE chest pain implementation. There are significant stakeholders here with a number of large meetings across the PCT – payers, consultants, commissioners, coronary care units, etc. The implementation involves a number of small ‘mini-projects’, putting different drugs into the formulary for specific uses to help implement NICE.

That’s the way proper process mapping occurs. It’s more about the drug assisting the pathway, not about the drug per se. I see a lot of work to be done here. But I also expect to see consistency across the PCT.

Read Omar’s previous article in this series on Account Management in pharma.

Omar Ali is the Formulary Development Pharmacist for Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust and sits on the External Reference Group for Cost Impact Modelling for NICE. He may be reached on omar.ali@sash.nhs.uk

For decades analysts have been trying to find the perfect formula for workplace satisfaction. Dr R K Powar explains how organisational behaviour can bring together essential cogs in the workplace to improve levels of productivity.

All businesses from the smallest enterprise to the largest of corporations consist of people designed to fulfil human objectives, and organisational behaviour seeks to understand how best to do this. Therefore, organisational behaviour can be described as the study of how individuals, groups and structure affect and are affected by behaviour within organisations, for the purpose of applying such knowledge towards improving an organisation’s effectiveness.

Management as a discipline, along with other disciplines, has been around for centuries. However, serious interest in the study of management did not emerge until the turn of the twentieth century, making organisational behaviour a relatively new subject. Also, the initial players interested in studying organisations were economists, who generally looked at management practices as efficient and effective, focusing on economic policies and industrial structures, rather than the internal structure of organisations.

A brief history

The Scientific Management Approach: this was developed by F W Taylor, who worked on the assumption that human beings are largely motivated by money. Taylor advised that managers pay monetary incentives to efficient workers, making employees work harder and faster, reducing them to machines. As this approach did not take account of the human facet of labour, it was heavily criticised and today is considered inadequate.

The Bureaucratic Approach: while the scientific approach worked on the interaction between workers and the task, this theory focused on devising the best organisational structure for workers and managers. Max Weber, the theory’s most prominent advocate, proposed a ‘bureaucratic form’ of structure which he thought would work for all organisations.

The Hawthorne Studies: The above two approaches were heavily criticised as they failed to take into consideration that the human aspect was important in the workplace. Whilst the Hawthorne Studies have had their share of criticism, they had a dramatic input in the field of organisational behaviour, highlighting that workers are influenced by social factors and the behaviour of the individual is influenced by the group.

Over the years, the study and practice of behaviour in the workplace has developed from initial human resource theory to the system approach and on to organisational behaviour, which has grown through creating alliances with disciplines such as leadership and anthropology. Today organisational behaviour is highly influential in the business world with practitioners like Peter Drucker and Peter Senge, who turned academic research into business principles – please refer to the article on the concept of the Learning Organisation in the April 2010 edition of Pharmaceutical Field.

The importance to pharma

Organisational behaviour is important to help us learn about ourselves and how to deal with others. It needs to be noted that people are complex and, whilst they have a need to acquire, individuals are multi-faceted and work for several reasons, such as the need to grow and develop and bond with others.

The pharmaceutical industry, like all industries, is in a constant state of flux faced with business competiveness and the need for increased networking and globalisation – where there is a greater need for individuals to work with people from diverse backgrounds and cultural values. Consequently, the pharmaceutical industry needs to be increasingly concerned with organisational behaviour, as it needs all employees to perform well to sustain success and in a nutshell become more productive.

At a practical level, these are some of the advantages offered by organisational behaviour:

Having more self-insight and perceptual skills to bring about the desired outcomes: The various facets of organisational behaviour can be used by all of us to understand our own feelings and behaviours. Starting from the premise of understanding ourselves is important in helping us understand others. The concepts of organisational behaviour can be used to bring about the desired outcome behaviour in others by sometimes modifying our feelings and behaviours towards others.

The ability to do this would be beneficial in all walks of life, and especially in the pharmaceutical industry. For example:

• Manager to employee: Having a greater awareness/understanding and appreciation will help bosses modify their management style to lead their staff appropriately to attain goals and hence become more productive.
• Motivate self and others: Organisations that perform well have a culture that promotes ongoing growth, learning and development. At the core of organisational behaviour paradigms rests the notion of how to bring out the best in others, so developing a good understanding of the principles of organisational behaviour and putting them into practice can help with motivation.
• Managers and employees’ interaction with external customers and stakeholders: Having a good understanding of organisational behaviour can help managers develop a better understanding of processes. This in turn can help managers interact with the various individuals outside the organisation, such as suppliers, competitors and customers. Managers can gain a better understanding of the environment in which they are working by using organisational behaviour to help them appreciate how and why things happen, giving them the advantage of being ahead in today’s competitive environment.

The ability to analyse situations correctly: A good understanding of the concepts of organisational behaviour can help staff and managers analyse situations correctly. All too often misunderstandings arise when situations haven’t been correctly understood. This can prove useful in the following ways:

• Avoid/manage conflict: A small amount of conflict can prove useful sometimes. However, where possible, if it’s likely to be destructive it needs to be avoided in the first instance, or be managed appropriately. With the sheer size of most pharmaceutical companies, the number of employees and the numerous relationships with the various stakeholders the probability of conflict arising can be quite high. Therefore, being able to curb this is of significant importance for the human relations and media departments.
• Better observational skills: This can be extremely useful for sales teams that need to be able to pick up on the buying signals, deal with obstructions and work with the complex set of interrelationships and dynamics that exist within the NHS.
• Recruitment and retention of skilled staff: A great deal of time and expenditure is involved in recruiting the right staff and the majority of the techniques and methods to do this employ organisational behaviour concepts in the form of questionnaires, psychological profiling and role-playing exercises at interviews. People work for several reasons and a better grasp of organisational behaviour concepts could be applied to retain staff, instead of developing them and then allowing them to leave and take the skills and knowledge they have gained elsewhere.

Limitations of organisational behaviour

• Having an understanding of organisational behaviour can help in situations of conflict but not eradicate them completely.
• Organisational behaviour is resistant to change due to human cognitive processes and defensive routines which can lead to ‘behavioural biases’, where the focus is on satisfying employees but overlooking the objectives of an organisation.
• The law of diminishing returns also applies to organisational behaviour: as this needs to be practised to an optimum point, when that point is exceeded there is a decline in returns. This highlights that organisational effectiveness is achieved when all variables work together.
• In some cases the knowledge and techniques of organisational behaviour could be used in a manipulative manner.

The future of organisational behaviour

Organisational behaviour has evolved over the years: initially from the need to create productive organisations, followed by a philosophical desire by many people to create more humanistic workplaces. Although organisational behaviour has certain limitations, hopefully by building a better working climate for people there are many advantages which should have longterm effects, not only in the quality of an individual’s life, but in improved harmony among people and among organisations.

The future success of organisational behaviour revolves around the related processes of theory development, research and managerial practice in areas such as communication between and among foreign business operations, cultural differences and motivation techniques in different countries, career development in the global economy, and the differences in leadership and decisionmaking practices in various countries.

The challenge faced by the pharmaceutical industry is to employ organisational behaviour to bring the various stakeholders and actors involved with different values together to create processes by which it can be efficient and effective in exceeding goals and objectives.

Dr R K Powar is the founder of R11OSY CONSULTANTS.

Pharma’s Account Management model is built on the principle that frontline professionals develop and deliver brand value propositions that align with the key priorities of key customers. But in a changing market where new customers are emerging, how well do you understand those priorities? Omar Ali pens Part I of a typical day in the life of a Formulary Pharmacist.

Despite consumers’ apparent lust for TV medical dramas and gruesome surgical documentaries, it’s unlikely that the viewing public would find a biopic centring on the work of a Formulary Pharmacist particularly enticing. But, for an audience of pharmaceutical sales professionals charged with understanding its customer-base, gaining an insight into the breadth and depth – and far-reaching implications – of a typical week in the life of NHS prescribing advisers, medicines management and formulary pharmacists should provide much food for thought.

Pharma appears desperate to establish the ‘key priorities’ of its many customers. This article, based on typical encounters with medical sales professionals, is a genuine attempt to outline mine.

A MONDAY MORNING, SOMEWHERE IN SURREY
8.10am: GI CONSULTANT / IBD.
(Discussion in the corridor)
Arrived at my NHS base camp. Stopped in the corridor by one of the GI Consultants who wants to set up a GPC/CCG commissioning group on GI Inflammatory Disease with one of the local Consortia - we ran one with Rheumatology framed around an osteoporosis brand. We put a date in the diary to discuss. I will be coordinating an IBD lunch event to facilitate joined-up working. Bringing in the GPCs is easy - I can text most of the GPs on the Commissioning Board of our local clusters, such is the relationship required for joined-up thinking. He’s very committed to his cause – and has very recently impressed significant knowledge and application of commissioning processes involved. Needless to say, many of his choice agents are either off-license or difficult to source from community pharmacies. He also has a whole stack of biologics he’s keen to use – but without some PCT discussions (and now outreaching to GPCs) he won’t get very far.

Thoughts for pharma

GI/IBD has become very noisy and in certain areas very controversial. Biologics are testing the very essence of ‘affordability’ in the NHS. We also know that by using them correctly, we can prevent signi­cant morbidity – surgery/admissions/etc. However, joined-up thinking doesn’t occur by magic – and you have a signifi­cant role in making this happen. When we coordinate this GPC/Hospital IBD lunch event, I am certain I will be discussing with various stakeholders, including pharma. NICE in principle supports a number of products but there are complexities. For example, bringing patients in for an IV infusion will generate income for the Trust – which funds a nurse who provides additional services. Patients treated at home may be a preferred option – there is no VAT. Home healthcare is not without its headaches around delivery, months’ supply ordered and administrative burden.

I am still disappointed at the level of pharma support I have seen here. There is far more that can be done to bring a clinical context into a financial framework. I call this the ‘Mortgage Principle’ – translating falling in love with a house into a financial framework with a defined loan: value and %APR with monthly repayments – see previous Matrix Revolutions. There seems to be a vast gap in understanding NHS processes – not just from pharma, but also from consultants – so improved process mapping from chronic disease to A&E through to post-discharge is essential. It also brings out the ‘true-cost’ of the disease in IBD – not just the ‘drug’s cost’. If our consultant doesn’t move ahead and advance his prescribing base, he will end up referring more patients to tertiary centres (which will only increase PCT costs) – so it’s important to put things into context here. Process Map the patient and the money will follow. If this is not tackled by pharma, I foresee the future of managed care entering here very neatly. Looking after the whole pathway and pushing pharma out to bystanders – look at companies like IHP, United Healthcare & Medco, it’s happening.

8.40am: Pharmacy Base.
(Discussion with the boss)
Arrived to my desk – finally. This time it’s the Chief waiting with an IFR/one-off-request that needs sorting. It’s the usual story: this time it’s a urology product that a GP is refusing to prescribe. We are having to push through the IFR/one-off-request – and also liaise with the GP for a medium-term solution (the patient is travelling significant distances to obtain this). This means some research, PCT discussions, GP emails and a phone call to the patient. I will also try and perch on the urology consultant’s shoulders (he runs a clinic this afternoon) and coordinate future D&T processes. Most of all, we need to ensure that the patient is central to this whole system – which is easier said than done. It’s good timing though – I have been in discussions with urology, working through the top-ten spend on the drug list to see where we have efficiency savings (something which is occurring across the whole trust in conjunction with PCTs & GPCs). This product initially came up as ‘not-on-the-radar’ but clearly needs some attention. I have our medicines information pharmacist conducting background research – I have emailed the specialist commissioning pharmacist at the PCT and CCd the prescribing adviser who has just evaluated a recent APC paper on overactive bladder prescribing (which we are discussing at our next D&T).

Thoughts for pharma

Urology is big on the radar. Many prescribing items are specialist, while there are significant prescribing efficiency savings aimed at ‘overactive bladder’ and linked into a more encompassing discussion with endocrinologists, and the ongoing story behind testosterone. I am sure I am sitting on a business card of a testosterone brand, but which company it was I cannot recall. Thumbing through my cards – the stack waiting for a call back is big – I can’t really see through the thick fog of various companies/pharma/sub-companies/take-overs. Note to self: request all staff to ensure reps write their brands on their business cards when they call at the pharmacy. Key priorities around urology that are high on the radar across primary/secondary care are as follows:

• Urinary retention/BPH
  Is it just me or has Combodart lost its way? I remember some very exciting joined up thinking on preventing unnecessary referrals and bringing consultants out to primary care. Given urology consultants admit themselves that DREs to exclude prostate Ca is not easy, liability and governance for getting GPs to this was always heading into a cul-de-sac. I think there is a ‘new campaign’, though I’m not sure what it is. We have both finasteride and dutasteride on our joint formulary – but I’m not seeing the right financial framework on the ground. I can see NHS PCOs moving backwards, lifting finasteride back on the pedestal and not even considering the Combodart story. If there is a value proposition around this brand someone better get this moving within commissioning circles fast. To add to this, tamsulosin’s patent expiry further hastens the need for the value story here. If the last D&T rejection we had is anything to go by this is either off the radar or must be a third drop-down detail on someone’s bonus scheme.
• Urinary incontinence
  We have NICE, LUTS and SMC. HTA is all important. Most of pharma focuses on product differentiation. They need to, NICE is an open forum for prescribing. But I don’t see a commissioning story or a decent value proposition for payers. Please don’t state you want to run me through a cost model – that is not a ‘value proposition’. I have yet to see a company come to me and talk about QIPP. Where are you guys? Please don’t moan at the NHS for using generic oxybuytnin first-line – we get the opposition, what we don’t get is a Payer ‘QIPP Value Proposition’ around your brand. Too much n=1 for my liking. The only brand working the NHS has to some extent are the solifenacin crowd – they certainly have significant clinician/KOL buy-in if the Payers are left somewhat ‘wanting’. I’m unsure where exactly duloxetine & fesoteradine are heading, or what their value story is – despite SMC approval. Maybe it’s just me.
• Bladder instillation
  This is hotting up big time. Why? Because there are costs to both primary and secondary care – and furthermore, despite numerous products – some without a license – for conditions such as interstitial cystitis there is significant unmet need on cure rates, relapse rates and hospitalisations. Someone, somewhere will win big when they map out to us what already suspect – hospitalisation costs here are huge, and process mapping will show how these are sectored into various health economies. At the moment, everyone is walking and talking product – bag of saline/infuse like this/lovely twisty connector/etc. Just waiting for someone like United or Medco to come and show us the path to the land of milk and honey. It appears no-one else will.
• Testosterone
  It’s back! The story has become interesting all over again, and all credit to pharma. The link with diabetes is moving this higher and higher up the agenda. It is fraught with issues. Everything from best mode of delivery to patient/compliance and desired effect, through to overlap with specialties – is this endocrine or urology or both, same pathway or different pathway? The pharmaceutical arguments in testosterone are worthy but having no coat hanger to hang your outcomes on makes for difficulty in pulling out the cheque book. There is a ‘gap-effect’ in situ – from academic niceties to clinical practice. I’m not sure the pull is there yet – and again, I return to my translation into a financial argument. Furthermore, there are cost savings and efficiencies to be had and this is where a product-matrix weighted with Payer Related Priorities would assist a brand in its Payer Value Proposition – if it indeed cares to invest in one.

It goes a bit like this:

1. What’s important to payers with a view to testosterone replacement?
2. Rank this list in a weighted manner so that they all add up to 100% (ie they may say evidence w%, compliance x%, safety y%, cost z% – w+x+y+z must all add up to 100%
3. Now you have your weighting, get the payers to allocate the numbers for each of the testosterone brands
4. Now you have not just who is the winner, but also how and why
5. So if, for instance, compliance is 25% weighting of the whole game, then if you spend 80% of your time talking about compliance, this may not be effecting your exposure time with payers to maximum benefit –remember the clinicians will have a different matrix. You may have the best compliance story – well done, that’s 25/25 but you will never score higher than this. There is another 75 points in this exam that you haven’t answered yet. You need to find out ‘what is the % weight that formulary/prescribing advisers give to the ‘testosterone story’ – once you have this value, you know how important it is.

9.30am: Meeting with Obs & Gynae Consultant / re: Formulary Application
This should be quick. We’ve recently put on some pessaries to our formulary. Obs and gynae want to use them in difficult/pre-specified labour/delivery situations. Now the company has whipped over a freezer to their unit. Yes, they are stored in the freezer, and no, before you ask, I don’t know whether we defrost before use or just pop them into our patients freezing cold. Have had a discussion about this with my wife over dinner, she is also a pharmacist – not a good move. Anyway, I’ve been firm but clear. The pharmacy doesn’t have a freezer, we need to discuss with the company about a freezer. There will be no prescribing of this new product within the Trust until we resolve the ‘freezer’ issue. All credit to the company, supportive they are, quick to respond they have been and, as I write, and you read, one of my staff is coordinating logistics around this. This is a classic example of simple supportive strategy. I looked back at the minutes of our D&T Form and smiled to myself… “accepted onto formulary, pending freezer.”

Omar Ali is the Formulary Development Pharmacist for Surrey & Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust & sits on the External Reference Group for Cost Impact Modelling for NICE. He may be reached on omar.ali@sash.nhs.uk