1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
65C953DCBFC56A6BA6525844E00346FD3
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/db-improving-impact-cns-field-based-medical-teams-major-global-markets-optimizing-staffing-resources?opendocument
18
19opendocument
203.229.122.219
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25DB




Products & Services Medical Affairs Medical Science Liaison

Improving the Impact of CNS Field-Based Medical Teams in Major Global Markets: Optimizing Staffing & Resources

ID: 5570


Features:

9 Info Graphics

20 Data Graphics

280+ Metrics

7 Narratives


Pages/Slides: 34


Published: 2019


Delivery Format: Online PDF Document


 

License Options:
close

Single User: Authorizes use by the person who places the order or for whom the order was placed.

Sitewide: Authorizes use of the report for a geographic site. All people at site can view the report for a year and copies can be printed.

Corporate: Authorizes use for the entire company for a year and copies can be printed. No limitations for usage inside the company.




Buy Now

 


  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • SPECIAL OFFER
Non-members: Click here to review a complimentary excerpt from “Improving the Impact of CNS Field-Based Medical Teams in Major Global Markets: Optimizing Staffing & Resources”

STUDY OVERVIEW

With a sizable geriatric population worldwide and high unmet medical needs, the global central nervous system (CNS) market holds potential for significant growth. However, the market for central nervous system drugs continues to face several restraints due to high development costs and competition across marketplaces.


Consequently, organizations looking to expand their CNS footprint in high-potential global markets must prepare field-based medical teams to effectively engage thought leaders and payers.

Best Practices, LLC conducted this benchmarking research to help companies fill knowledge gaps around key CNS MSL/field-based medical team operational areas, including: staffing levels, resource allocations, and preferred MSL qualification and experience. This research also will help identify key deficiencies and opportunities for overcoming challenges, such as integrating HOLs into the field team, covering large key accounts, and measuring overall MSL value and effectiveness.

This research provides data in several segments: All Participants (Total Benchmark Class); Global (Outside US); North America Responses; and Europe Responses.

KEY TOPICS

  • Optimization of CNS field-based medical team staffing levels
  • Regional differences when building CNS field-based medical teams
  • Number of thought leaders that are supported by MSLs
  • How CNS field teams are staffed depending on stage of product lifecycle
  • Budget allocations and revenue supported per MSL

KEY METRICS

  • On average, how many total products (including both in-line and in development products) does an MSL support within the primary country?
  • How many total field based medical staff are allocated to each of the listed roles?
  • What percentage of thought leaders served by an individual MSL are KOLs versus HCPs?
  • How many large key accounts does each of your MSL support on average?
  • On average, how many payers does each of your HOL support?
  • On average, what percentage of the peak MSL team size is assigned to support a product at each phase of the typical product lifecycle?
  • How effective is it to bring an MSL onboard to support a product in each phase of the product lifecycle?
  • On average, how many years of MSL experience do your MSLs have?
  • What is the average approximate revenue supported by each MSL (in-line revenue only)?

SAMPLE KEY FINDINGS

  • Effective MSL Backgrounds:
    • More than 40% of MSLs are pharmacists, with ~35% being scientists or physicians.
    • MSLs are most likely to have a pharmacist background (43%). MSLs with backgrounds as a scientist (38%) or physician (32%) are also common. Just 9% of MSLs are former nurses. U.S. field-medical teams make extensive use of pharmacists (54% of all MSLs), while EU5 field teams leverage scientists and physicians more heavily (nearly 60%).


METHODOLOGY

Best Practices, LLC engaged 17 medical affairs and field-based medical team leaders working in CNS/neurology/pain management therapeutic area at 15 leading biopharma companies through a benchmarking survey. Six deep-dive interviews were conducted with medical affairs leaders, whose insights were provided to enrich the data and add real-world context to the metrics and trends established. To provide clear understanding of field medical trends across major markets, benchmark data is segmented by: Total Benchmark Class (N=17); Global Market Segment, excluding U.S. (N=9); North America Market Segment (N=8); and Europe (EU5) Market Segment (N=6).

Industries Profiled:
Pharmaceutical; Biopharmaceutical; Biotech; Manufacturing; Chemical; Health Care; Medical Device


Companies Profiled:
AcelRx; Alkermes; Allergan; Amgen; Biogen; Chiesi; Daiichi Sankyo; Gedeon Richter ; Genentech; Janssen; Merck; Pfizer; Roche; Shire; Sunovion

If you purchase Best Practice Database document(s), you will have 30 days from the date of purchase to apply some or all of the cost of the document(s) toward the cost of a Full Access Individual, Pharma, Group or University Membership. Write us at DatabaseTeam@bestpracticesllc.com or call David Guinn at 919-767-9179 if you have any questions.