Three-quarters of respondents reported that they covered the regulation and/or ethics of drug promotion, with the highest proportion of these reporting that national government regulation of promotion was covered (see Table 5). There was little coverage of international standards such as the WHO Ethical Criteria for Medicinal Drug Promotion or the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA) Code of Marketing Practices. Many countries do not have a functioning drug regulatory agency or other national private or public sector organizations responsible for overseeing drug promotion. However, companies that are members of the IFPMA, the international pharmaceutical industry association, are subject to the IFPMA Code.
Table 5a describes responses by region. Differences would be expected by region, given the differences in national approaches to regulation and/or resources available for drug regulation. It is unsurprising, for example, that fewer European respondents mentioned the IFPMA Code than respondents from Africa, as in Europe national regulations are more likely to be in place.
Table 5: Regulation and ethics of drug promotion
| |
Pharmacy n=91 |
Medical n=137 |
Combined n=228 |
Are regulation and ethics covered? |
70 (77%) |
100 (73%) |
170 (75%) |
No response |
4 (5%) |
5 (4%) |
9 (4%) |
By region |
|
|
|
Africa |
11 (92%) |
7 (88%) |
18 (90%) |
Western Pacific |
7 (70%) |
20 (95%) |
27 (87%) |
Americas |
23 (77%) |
21 (81%) |
44 (79%) |
South-East Asia |
7 (78%) |
8 (73%) |
15 (75%) |
Europe |
17 (77%) |
45 (64%) |
62 (67%) |
Eastern Mediterranean |
5 (63%) |
0 |
5 (56%) |
Types of regulation covered |
Pharmacy n=91 |
Medical n=137 |
Combined n=228 |
National government regulation of promotion* |
62 (68%) |
66 (48%) |
128 (56%) |
Professional codes on interactions w/ industry |
52 (58%) |
62 (45%) |
114 (50%) |
Ethical issues - interactions with industry |
40 (44%) |
59 (43%) |
99 (43%) |
National industry self-regulatory codes |
32 (35%) |
32 (23%) |
64 (28%) |
WHO Ethical Criteria |
20 (22%) |
27 (20%) |
47 (21%) |
IFPMA Code of Marketing Practices |
11 (12%) |
7 (5%) |
18 (8%) |
Other |
2 (2%) |
10 (7%) |
12 (5%) |
Most responses to ‘other’ specified categories above, such as the American Medical Association code, Swedish Regulatory Committee, etc.; one on gifts (ethical)
* pharmacy and medical school responses differed significantly, p<.05
Table 5a: Types of regulation covered - by region
| |
Europe (n=92) |
Americas (n=56) |
W. Pacific (n=31) |
Africa (n=20) |
SE Asia (n=20) |
E. Mediterr (n=9) |
National government regulation of promotion |
51 (55%) |
31 (55%) |
19 (61%) |
13 (65%) |
10 (50%) |
4 (44%) |
Professional codes on interactions w/ industry |
41 (45%) |
37 (66%) |
15 (48%) |
12 (60%) |
7 (35%) |
2 (22%) |
Ethical issues - interactions with industry |
31 (34%) |
30 (54%) |
22 (71%) |
11 (55%) |
3 (15%) |
2 (22%) |
Industry self-regulatory codes |
23 (25%) |
20 (36%) |
11 (36%) |
6 (30%) |
3 (15%) |
1 (11%) |
WHO Ethical Criteria |
12 (13%) |
7 (13%) |
7 (23%) |
9 (45%) |
10 (50%) |
2 (22%) |
IFPMA Code of Marketing Practices |
5 (5%) |
3 (5%) |
3 (10%) |
3 (15%) |
4 (20%) |
0 |