Capturing the Practitioner Market:

Relate and Educate

Capturing the Practitioner Market:
Relate and Educate

U.S. demand for nutraceuticals is steadily increasing, with a projected 7-percent rise to $2.7 billion in sales for 2004, according to the Freedonia Group (Chem Week, 163, 3:27, 2001). This demand signals a grand opportunity for nutritional supplement companies, particularly those whose sights are already shifting toward the qualified health care practitioner market.

The practitioner channel is made up of more than 1.1 million M.D.s, complementary care physicians and allied health care professionals, including osteopaths, naturopaths, chiropractors, physicians assistants, nurse practitioners, acupuncturists, pharmacists, Ayurvedic doctors, Traditional Chinese Medicine practitioners, nutritionists and dietitians. Analysis of statistics provided by Nutrition Business Journal indicates growth in nutraceutical sales in the practitioner market has surpassed traditional, consumer-focused channels, with an average increase in sales to practitioners of 14 percent from 1997 to 2001, as compared to a 7-percent growth rate for the entire supplement market during that same time period. Further, the practitioner market is estimated to grow at a rate of 9 percent to 10 percent over the next three years.

While the majority of supplement companies have shied away from this market in the past for fear that the group, as a whole, was less open to nutritional supplements than consumers, they now have the opportunity to face their fears and profit from this increasingly viable distribution channel. Beyond the traditional practitioners lack of education in the field of nutraceutical supplementation, supplement companies have feared the research costs necessary to support and market their products, given an unclear return on investment (ROI) and an uncertain timeframe to realize profits. Health care practitioners will generally pass over a companys products, regardless of the anecdotal support patients offer, unless the company has invested in valid clinical trials supporting their usea luxury to which traditional practitioners have grown accustomed with pharmaceutical companies. A quality research study starts at $25,000 and can cost upwards of $100,000. Further, federal law prohibits effective use of data collected from clinical trials in marketing claims, beyond the structure/function and health claims already being made. The time line associated with completing and using the results of a clinical trial to sell product presents another significant drawback, with published studies typically taking between two and 10 years to complete, depending upon the study design. Perhaps most daunting is the threat that, without a durable patent, a competitor will use your research to develop and market products at a fraction of your cost, with minimal investment and minimal risk.

Maximizing ROI With Peer Discussion Groups

Despite the traditional arguments against investing in research, solid science is a prerequisite to gaining practitioner market share in the nutraceutical industry. The solution to gaining a timely return on research investment lies in the use of peer-to-peer discussion groups, a means of educating and relating to practitioners that is employed by leading pharmaceutical companies such as GlaxoSmithKline and Eli Lily. Big Pharma has been successfully using these marketing/sales sessions for more than 20 years as a means of capitalizing on the research money it spends, sometimes even before a clinical trial of products is published.

These one- to two-hour regional sessions typically involve no more than 20 doctors who are invited to join as members of an advisory group. Participants are chosen based on their ability to influence peersso-called thought leaders. They are mailed reprints of monographs, published or unpublished clinical trial data, and supportive sales literature about two weeks prior to the session. The doctors are wined, dined, compensated and encouraged by a highly trained and knowledgeable moderator to discuss the product, its uses and indications, competitor products and (very carefully) off-label uses. Advisory sessions typically take place over dinner, offering a casual atmosphere that breeds relaxation and a general acceptance of presented material. This strategy has proved invaluable to Big Pharma for increasing sales and executing targeted marketing campaigns with little to no risk. According to specialists in this field, the ROI to companies employing peer-to-peer discussion groups is estimated at roughly 120 percent, after 10 months of use, though no one knows for sure, since all data associated with these prized advisory sessions are held in strict confidence.

It all makes perfect sense when you compare these sessions with traditional sales calls to the health care practitioner. On average, a sales representative calls a targeted practitioner six times per year. The sales call typically lasts about five minutes and occurs within the context of a fastpaced, busy medical office. This translates to a total of 30 minutes of exposure per year. On the other hand, one peer-to-peer discussion group session with 20 practitioners guarantees at least 60 minutes of their dedicated, uninterrupted attention. A simple calculation shows that one product session equals approximately two years of concentrated sales calls to a single practitioner.

While there are many classic fears associated with investing in clinical research on nutraceutical products, peer-to-peer discussion groups can address each of these. (See table below for more information.) Investing in research makes sense, now that nutraceutical companies have access to viable means of capitalizing on research dollars spent without the lag time traditionally associated with this marketing/sales strategy. Further incentive to invest in this strategy comes from statistics regarding practitioner exposure to nutraceutical information that demonstrate increased usage of product after exposure. This opportunity is available to nutraceutical companies willing to fill the practitioners need for quality education.

It is comforting to note that one third of all Americans are trying complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), primarily nutraceutical products, thereby forcing practitioners to take a closer look at this treatment modality. The Wall Street Journal recently released a report stating that, in the past two years, the number of medical centers with CAM clinics rose to nearly 100, up from fewer than 12 in 2000. Additionally, hospital profits dropped 38 percent between 1997 and 2001, forcing these health care institutions to take note of public demand and new revenue sources. CAM therapies are generating substantial profit, with nutraceuticals leading the way. Interestingly, 91 of the 125 U.S. medical schools now offer some form of CAM as part of a required curriculum, with leading medical colleges such as Yale, the University of California and Columbia University taking this trend toward CAM use in the general population quite seriously.

Education = Market Share

The level of CAM education among traditional health care practitioners is increasing. However, knowledge about the proper use of nutraceutical products among this group is still lacking. So, while 85 percent of the general population is influenced by their doctors position on the use of natural products (according to the Natural Marketing Institutes 2003 Health and Wellness Trends Report), only 8 percent actually make a specific natural product purchasing decision based on their doctors recommendations. The reason? Health care practitioners lack the education to confidently recommend specific nutraceutical products. Now, more then ever, nutritional supplement companies have the opportunity to fill the immediate educational need of the practitioner for accurate and clinically relevant information on the use of natural products.

The relative upsurge in media reports on nutritional supplements has been both a blessing and a curse for the nutraceutical industry. While increasing exposure for the industry, the information that consumers and practitioners receive is both contradictory and confusing. Further, sales of specific products are directly affected by these media reports, usually adversely. As varying studies are publicized on the effects (or lack thereof) of nutritional supplements, nutraceutical companies experience a dramatic fluctuation in product sales, which ultimately leads to loss rather than profit.

This increase in media reports, while posing a serious threat, also affords a unique opportunity to provide quality, accurate and reliable education to practitioners who are faced with answering consumer questions with confidence and ease and who desire to fill the role of knowledgeable authority for their patients. Practitioners, by nature, are seekers of truth and are always hungry for more information. The confusion as to the safety and efficacy of nutritional supplements projected by the media translates into an opportunity for nutritional supplement companies to offer these practitioners the quality education they need, which inevitably breeds loyal and long-lasting relationships between educator (the nutraceutical company) and practitioner.

Peer-to-peer discussion groups offer an effective means of educating practitioners with quality and accurate information that is not limited by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), while at the same time fostering loyalty and demonstrating that the host company is committed to research and education.

Now, more then ever, nutritional supplement companies have a significant incentive to market their existing products, or a complementary line of products exclusive to the health care practitioner market. Peer-topeer discussion groups offer an intelligible means of establishing a nutraceutical company as one rooted in science, known for marketing scientifically sound products and thereby capturing the attention of the growing health care practitioner market. These sessions foster lasting relationships between practitioner and nutraceutical company by filling the practitioners increasing need for education, without being limited to the marketing jargon companies are forced to use within the limitations imposed by the government. Likewise, practitioners are forever in search of quality information on how best to help their patients. Peer-to-peer discussion groups offer practitioners the opportunity to interact with one another and share their knowledge while at the same time receiving from the host company quality information about key nutraceuticals that promote health. The bottom line? Peer-to-peer discussion groups build genuine partnerships between companies and practitioners, which translates into increased sales in the health care practitioner market.

Gina Nick, Ph.D., and Noah Miller are chief scientific officer and president, respectively, at Longevity Through Prevention, a business-tobusiness consulting firm that offers turnkey solutions to the nutraceutical industry. They can be reached at (866) 587-4622 or at www.ltponline.com.

Share this article: Email, Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Yahoo!MyWeb, Windows Live Favorites, Furl
Add this article feed to: RSS, My Yahoo, Newsgator, Bloglines