1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
662840AB9BD6432CD6525834E00441A68
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/db-improving-impact-field-based-medical-teams-major-global-markets-optimizing-staffing-resources?opendocument
18
19opendocument
203.91.106.44
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25DB




Products & Services Medical Affairs Medical Science Liaison

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

ID: 5535


Features:

9 Info Graphics

22 Data Graphics

320+ Metrics

7 Narratives


Pages/Slides: 36


Published: 2018


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 Field-Based Medical Teams in Major Global Markets: Optimizing Staffing & Resources”

STUDY OVERVIEW

Around the globe, field-based medical teams play a significant role in effectively engaging thought leaders and developing long-term relationships. For this reason alone, it is important for pharmaceutical companies to build a robust field-based medical team.

And one of the key components of an effective field-based medical team is the allocation of resources, both in terms of staffing and budget levels.

Best Practices, LLC undertook this study to help organizations fill knowledge gaps around key MSL/field-based medical team operational areas, including: staffing levels, resource allocations, revenue supported by MSLs, staffing levels across development phases, and preferred MSL qualification and experience. This research also examines HOL staffing on global field teams.

Research insights will help inform field-based medical and other leadership teams about the region-specific strategies employed by other organizations and help carve out a framework for expanding their footprint in high-potential global markets.

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

KEY TOPICS

  • Optimization of field-based medical team staffing levels
  • Regional differences when building field-based medical teams
  • Number of thought leaders that are supported by MSLs
  • How 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 your primary country?
  • How many total 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:
    • Nearly 50% of MSLs are pharmacists, with ~35% being scientists or physicians.
    • MSLs are most likely to have a pharmacist background (47%). MSLs with backgrounds as a scientist (38%) or physician (31%) are also common. Just 14% of MSLs are former nurses. U.S. field-medical teams make extensive use of pharmacists (56% of all MSLs), while EU5 field teams leverage scientists and physicians more heavily.
METHODOLOGY

Best Practices, LLC engaged 55 medical affairs and field-based medical team leaders from a total of 36 top pharma and biotech organizations through a benchmarking survey. Six deep-dive interviews were also conducted. To offer clear understanding of field medical trends across major markets, benchmark data is segmented by: Total Benchmark Class (N=69); Global Market Segment, excluding U.S. (N=38); North America Market Segment (N=31); Europe (EU5) Market Segment (N=24); and JAPAC Market Segment (N=5).


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


Companies Profiled:
AbbVie; AcelRx; Alkermes; Allergan; Allergopharma; Amgen; Astellas; AstraZeneca; Bayer; Biogen; Chiesi; Cooper Surgical; Daiichi Sankyo; Eisai; EMD Serono; Ferring Pharmaceuticals; Gedeon Richter ; Genentech; GlaxoSmithKline ; Ipsen; Janssen; Kyowa Kirin; Merck; Merck KGaA; Novartis; Novelion Therapeutics; Novo Nordisk; Pfizer; Roche; Shire; Sunovion; UCB Pharma; Vertex Pharmaceuticals; Vifor Pharma; ViiV Healthcare; ZS Pharma

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.