[e-drug] Medicines Australia Code of Conduct Breaches

[e-drug@healthnet.org]

E-DRUG: Medicines Australia Code of Conduct Breaches
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[Australian Prescriber December 2007, includes several articles that might be of interest to e-druggers.  The journal is easily accessible on line but some short articles and abstracts are posted for your information.  
The complete contents of this issue can be found at 
http://www.australianprescriber.com/magazine/30/6  
....  BS ]

Medicines Australia Code of Conduct Breaches

The article including the table with full details can be found at
http://www.australianprescriber.com/upload/pdf/articles/922.pdf

Medicines Australia has a Code of Conduct to guide the promotion of prescription drugs by pharmaceutical companies in Australia. A new edition of the Code has recently been approved.1 Complaints are considered by the Code of Conduct Committee and the results are published in its annual report. The report for 2006/07 is available on the Medicines Australia website.2

This year's report contains detailed information about 41 complaints. In fourteen cases no breach of the Code was found. There were 27 complaints in which at least one breach of the Code was found. As usual, most of the complaints were made by rival pharmaceutical companies, but 12 were made by health professionals. 

Most of the breaches were for using misleading information in promotional material. Some of the larger fines were imposed on companies that had allowed the public to be exposed to their promotions. Two complaints related to a company which sponsored the national conference of a patient support group. An article, originally drafted for health professionals, but published in Reader's Digest, clearly breached the Code.

Another breach, identified by several complaints, was offering a 'money-back guarantee' to patients being treated for erectile dysfunction.

The information in the report reveals some of the sophisticated strategies companies can use. One company had used a public relations consultant to manage a campaign about a medicine which had yet to be approved in Australia. This included sponsoring a journalist to attend an overseas conference about the drug. Issuing a media release on an unapproved drug was considered to be promotional activity which breached the Code.

The Committee had to grapple with what constitutes excessive hospitality. One company was fined for providing a function that was not 'simple or modest', while a function at the Crown Towers in Melbourne was ruled to be 'not extravagant'. Perhaps the new requirement for companies to disclose the cost of their promotional functions will help the Code of Conduct Committee decide what is appropriate.

References
1. Medicines Australia. Code of Conduct. 15th ed. 2006.
Amended Aug 2007.
http://www.medicinesaustralia.com.au [cited 2007 Nov 12]
2. Medicines Australia Code of Conduct Annual Report
2006/2007. Canberra: Medicines Australia; 2007.
http://www.medicinesaustralia.com.au [cited 2007 Nov 12]


The story of one complaint
------------------------
John S Dowden, Editor, Australian Prescriber

An advertising campaign for vardenafil encouraged men with erection difficulties to seek treatment. The advertisement included the product logo and the name of the company. The imagery, of an upright banana, was also used in the advertising to health professionals. As part of this parallel campaign, doctors and pharmacists were informed that the company would offer a money-back guarantee to patients.

I made a complaint to Medicines Australia as I believed that the advertising to the public would stimulate demand for a particular product and the money-back guarantee could be seen as an inducement. Complaints were also made by two pharmacists and the Australian Consumers' Association.

The Code of Conduct Committee considered my complaint within a month and sent me its decision within six weeks. The ruling was in an extract of the minutes of the Committee's meeting. This showed that there had been a severe breach of the Code of Conduct, but I was asked to keep the ruling confidential in case there was an appeal. As there was no appeal the complaint was finalised and details appear in the Code of Conduct Annual Report.1 

The Code of Conduct Committee considered that the advertising campaign could have breached nine sections of the Code, however only one breach was confirmed. A majority of the Committee considered that the campaign brought discredit to the industry. This was not because the banana images were in poor taste, but because a money-back guarantee was considered to decrease the value of prescription medicines.

The Code of Conduct Committee did not fine the company for the severe breach, but ordered it to immediately cease the promotion offering the money-back guarantee. Corrective letters had to be sent to all health professionals who received the promotion and corrective advertisements had to be placed in health professional journals which had published advertisements about the money-back guarantee.

Reference
1. Medicines Australia Code of Conduct Annual Report
2006/2007. Canberra: Medicines Australia; 2007.
http://www.medicinesaustralia.com.au [cited 2007 Nov 12]