NHS Payer Engagement is Dead- Or is there another way?

After recent newspaper reports highlighting payments made to NHS employees, pharmaceutical companies have been concerned and many have made significant changes to the way they use NHS Advisory boards. The NHS has reviewed its own guidance on working with pharmaceutical companies and ensuring NHS staff properly disclose “conflicts of interest”.  

Conflict of interests

As far as can be worked out, a conflict of interest is receiving any type of payment from a pharmaceutical company, even re-reimbursement for time. Or at least as far as NHS England is concerned.

I am not defending anyone here, it would appear from the news articles that pharmaceutical companies were offering considerable sums of money for repeated meetings, (An advisory board should be several meetings, if not it’s just an advisory meeting) and some in the NHS were taking the money and making promises.

In the NHS England Board Letter 1 example or interpretation given was:

Staff being paid upwards of ￡500 a day to attend meetings to essentially be lobbied by industry to adopt their products for use in the NHS;

If this is how things are perceived as happening, then the advisory board has gone wrong. I know it has happened, I have seen advisory boards with both clinicians and payers that have been little more than an embellished selling exercise, where precious few questions have been asked and those that have been are very carefully planned to steer towards a pre-designed conclusion.

Conflict of Interest. This term seems to be at the center of everything, but surely in these austere times,

what we need to achieve is an alignment of interests.

So is there another way?

A pharmaceutical drug on the market, needs to demonstrate value, or if its new to the market have an idea of its value which may then be proven or not. More forward thinking companies are putting quality, health economic outcomes into phase III research and taking drugs to market with at least the value proven in clinical trial.

The Advisory board or meeting is important in order for pharmaceutical companies and the NHS to start to identify together a brands value, including the economic factors.

This has to be the sole purpose of the meeting. I.e. Get Advisory boards back on track and doing what they are designed for. Being mutually beneficial. One party taking advise from a group of experts in order that a mutually beneficial position can be reached, either an explanation of how to achieve it or guidance on how to make the changes needed to achieve the required outcome, and yes this could include dropping the price.

So in short the other way is to get back to what an advisory board should be. Ensuring that the whole advisory board is clear, transparent and involves experts advising. Experts get paid for their advice and nothing more.

An industry medic taught me that if I would be happy with what I was doing being printed in the national press, it’s probably the right thing to do, if I wasn’t happy it’s probably something I shouldn’t be doing.

At C4H Solutions we believe we have the solutions and the experts to get control back of advisory boards, they are a vital part of the pharmaceutical industries engagement strategy. C4H Solutions work with highly experienced Ex NHS managers and consultants all with a wide range of experience, knowledge and insight to support you in understanding the ever changing NHS landscape and the key stakeholders within the organisational structures that are now forming such as STPs. 

We can work at an advisory board level quickly and effectively with our flexible advisory board solutions or we can work with individual brands to help you identify the value of your brand to the NHS.

To find out more about the services we offer check out our website or email me directly to set up a no obligation consultation to identify the right support for you.