Abstract: Background: Pharmaceutical companies aggressively pursue drug promotional activities to gain a large market share. Printed brochures are among the most commonly used marketing media, but they often highlight advantages while minimizing safety information, thereby influencing prescribing patterns and impacting clinical decision-making.
Aim: To critically evaluate the rationality of drug promotional literature (DPL) using the World Health Organization (WHO) ethical criteria.
Methods: A total of 120 DPLs were collected from clinicians across multiple specialties in a tertiary care teaching hospital in central India. Each DPL was systematically assessed against the 11 ethical criteria recommended by WHO for drug promotion. Data were tabulated and analyzed using descriptive statistical methods.
Results: The most frequently promoted therapeutic groups were antibiotics (28%), antidiabetic drugs (24%), and cardiovascular medicines (18%). Approximately 60% of the brochures were for fixed-dose combinations (FDCs). While all brochures mentioned the manufacturer’s name, only 48% carried a complete address. Information completeness was inadequate—contraindications were provided in 30%, adverse drug reactions in 26%, and precautions in 22%, and no brochure contained information regarding drug interactions. Only 3% of brochures complied fully with the WHO criteria. Of the 156 references cited, the majority (90%) were from journals, but fewer than half were recent.
Conclusion: The majority of DPLs failed to provide balanced and complete information, favoring promotional intent over scientific accuracy. Enhanced regulatory control and greater physician awareness are essential and urgently needed to promote rational prescribing.
Indexed in Index Copernicus
Research Journals