The Corporate Reputation of Pharma in 2021 - The Patient Perspective - Respiratory Edition - The Views of 121 Respiratory Conditions Patient Groups

The ‘Corporate Reputation of Pharma’ survey- Respiratory Edition, now in its 7th year, and two years into the Covid-19 pandemic. Between November 2021-February 2022, the survey collected the opinions of 121 respiratory-conditions patient groups on the performance of the pharmaceutical industry during 2021.

Patient groups-and respiratory-conditions patient groups especially possess a deep and unique understanding of the patients they represent and express the collated views of these patients. Patient-group perspectives have become increasingly important to regulators that demand patient input into trial design and conduct (as well as into the evaluation of clinical outcomes). At the same time, many patient groups are also familiar with the complexities of the pharmaceutical industry’s business. From their vantage point, therefore, patient groups are both able to assess pharma, and recommend ways in which companies can improve-all from a patient perspective.

The report provides details on:

• How the analyst measures pharma’s corporate reputation from a patient perspective; 
• The companies included in the 2021 respiratory-conditions analysis; 
• The headline results of the 2021 survey, from the perspective of respiratory-conditions patient groups; and 
• The profiles of 2021’s respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups. 

The 16 companies included in the respiratory-conditions arm of the 2021 ‘Corporate Reputation of Pharma’ analyses: 
AbbVie - AstraZeneca - Bayer - Boehringer Ingelheim - Chiesi Farmaceutici - Eli Lilly - GSK - Janssen - Merck & Co/MSD - Mylan - Novartis - Pfizer - Roche/Genentech/Chugai - Sandoz - Sanofi - Teva. 

SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

FINDINGS AT INDUSTRY-WIDE LEVEL
2021’s respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups judged the pharma industry’s corporate reputation to outperform that of all other healthcare sectors, including medical device companies, biotech, and retail pharmacists, with 61% of them rating the industry’s corporate reputation as “Excellent” or “Good”. This figure has risen from 38% over the seven years in which the respiratory-conditions arm of the ‘Corporate Reputation’ survey has been running.

Although 69% of 2021’s respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups rated the pharma’s industry’s response to the pandemic as “Very effective” or “Effective” - up on 2020’s figure of 59% - this 2021 figure is still lower than 2021’s global, therapy-wide average of 76%. Given the direct impact of Covid-19 on the health of patients with a respiratory condition, the suggestion has to be that respiratory-conditions patient groups believe more could have been done for so vulnerable a patient population. A 2020 report from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concluded that over a third of adult patients hospitalised with Covid-19 had been living with a prior respiratory condition, such as chronic-obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). 

Positive about pharma’s R&D, but respiratory patient groups seek improvements from pharma in other areas 
As many as 63% of 2021’s respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups believed the pharma industry was “Excellent” or “Good” at making high-quality products of benefit to patients. Similarly, 53% stated that pharma was “Excellent” or “Good” at innovation. However, these same patient groups marked the industry down for a range of other issues, including: pharma’s transparency; its pricing issues; helping patients gain access to medicines; services provided by pharma outside of medicines; integrity; engagement of patients in R&D; and, even, the quality of pharma’s relations with patient groups themselves. 69% of 2021’s respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups mentioned working with at least one pharma company, yet only 43% of the respiratory-conditions patient groups thought the industry “Excellent” or “Good” at relationships with them.  

Patient-group relationships are key 
A 2020 study looking at the impact the pandemic had on patients and patient groups gained feedback from 75 respondents respiratory-conditions patient groups. These patient groups emphasised the increased stigma experienced by patients with respiratory conditions during the pandemic-other members of the public typically assumed such individuals had Covid-19, and, therefore, might infect them. [Patient-Group Experiences of the Covid-19 Pandemic, September 2020]. 

This was one of the types of pandemic-generated patient hurdles that 2021’s respondent respiratory conditions patient groups felt pharma should at least have appreciated, and, ideally, made some sort of effort to help with. The same 2020 study found that 74% of the 75 respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups registered a reduction in their revenues during the pandemic. The patient groups stated that they accordingly hoped for greater flexibility in pharma/patient-group relations, and called for companies to focus support on the most-pressing needs of patient-group partners during the crisis. Those expectations were repeated in the feedback to the respiratory-conditions arm of the 2021 ‘Corporate  Reputation’ survey. An Ireland-based national asthma-and-COPD patient group requested that  companies reconsider their approach to patient groups:    

“Funding projects identified by patient organisations as being key. Funding capacity-building projects, as patient organisations need funding and support to become more resilient, and to survive the funding-and-organisational challenges of the last two years.  Support in digital-strategy development, as this is only growing in importance, is often not a  key skill-set, and is expensive to develop. Less campaign- and PR-related funding, and more funding of  what patients need.”    

In summary  2021’s 121 respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups identified the main areas in which they  felt the pharma industry performed best-particularly, developing medicines valuable to patients- while, at the same time, stressing the extent to which the industry needs to improve if it is to be considered as truly putting patients first. The historically low-scoring corporate-reputation indicators of fair pricing and involving patients in R&D will take time to improve, but a renewed post-pandemic approach to pharma’s relationships with respiratory-conditions patient groups (patient groups that represented some of the most-vulnerable patients in 2020 and 2021) is perhaps a topic that could most easily turn around declining perceptions. 

COMPANY RANKINGS IN THE FIELD OF RESPIRATORY CONDITIONS 

• The top-three pharma companies out of 16 companies, ranked for their overall corporate reputation in 2021, as assessed by respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups familiar with the company: Boehringer Ingelheim, 1st - Sanofi, 2nd - Pfizer, 3rd. 
• The top-three pharma companies out of 10 companies, ranked for their overall corporate reputation in 2021, as assessed by respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups working with the company: Janssen, 1st - Sanofi, 2nd - Boehringer Ingelheim, 3rd. 
• The top-three ‘big-pharma’ companies out of 10 companies, ranked for their overall corporate reputation in 2021, assessed by respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups familiar with the company: Pfizer, =1st - Sanofi, =1st - AstraZeneca, 3rd. 
• The top-three ‘big-pharma’ pharma companies out of 8 companies, ranked for their overall corporate reputation in 2021, assessed by respondent respiratory-conditions patient groups working with the company: Janssen, 1st - Sanofi, 2nd - Roche, 3rd.