Home � Products & Services � Benchmarking Reports � Medical Affairs � Field Medical Excellence

Building Strong Field-Based Medical Teams to Support New Cardiovascular and Diabetes Products

Download FREE Excerpt

ID: POP-290

Features:

6 Info Graphics

25 Data Graphics

480+ Metrics

Pages: 43

Published: Pre-2019

Delivery Format: Shipped

License Options:
$3950 - 1 user
$11850 - Up to 5 users
$19750 - Up to 20 users

Buy Now

919-403-0251

Schedule a Meeting

STUDY OVERVIEW
BENCHMARK CLASS
STUDY SNAPSHOT
KEY FINDINGS
VIEW TOC AND LIST OF EXHIBITS

Field-based medical teams comprise a diverse set of liaisons who serve critical external customers such as physicians, payers and patients. In this task it is vital to assign and execute distinct roles and responsibilities to each of these liaison types to avoid internal conflict and improve customer engagement.

Best Practices, LLC undertook this benchmarking research to identify the strategies employed by leading biotech and pharmaceutical companies to develop effective field-based medical teams, especially in support of new treatments in the cardiovascular and diabetes therapeutic areas. This report provides powerful insights and benchmarks into the deployment of Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) and Health Outcomes Liaisons (HOLs), including value associated with key field-based activities, time allocation for critical activities, key performance indicators, thought leader visit frequency, staffing and training trends.

Industries Profiled:
Companies Profiled:
Abbott; Abbvie; Bayer; Incyte; Kyowa Kirin; MSD; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche; Sanofi; UCB Pharma; ZS Pharma

Study Snapshot

Best Practices, LLC engaged 14 Medical Affairs leaders from 12 companies focused on cardiovascular and metabolic therapeutic areas. Eighty-five percent of benchmark partners are at the Senior Director level or higher.

Key topics covered in this report include:

I. Field-Based Medical Team Activities

Actual time spent on key activities vs. expected time allocation
Demonstrating value to key stakeholders
Key performance indicators
Visit frequency for building and maintaining thought leader relationships

II. Field-Based Medical Team Staffing

Span of control and headcount
Reasons behind change in headcount

III. Field-Based Medical Team Training

Training standardization vs customization
Format and frequency

Key Findings

Sample key insights uncovered from this report are noted below. Detailed findings are available in the full report.

1. Value vs. Time Spent on Activities: There are areas that MSL and HOL teams should consider spending more time on because of the associated high value.

HOL teams have the opportunity to increase time allocation on KOL management and congress support/attendance: While 60% of participants find these activities very valuable, HOLs spend 5hrs. / week on KOL management and 2 hrs. / week on congress support/attendance.

2. Training Areas and Standardization:

Training most frequently conducted for field-based medical teams are:
- New product and scientific training
- Launch tactics & strategy training
While majority of the participants use standardized training for their field-based medical teams, they prefer to customize certain parts of their training programs. Three customized areas are: 1. Scientific information 2. Therapeutic area of focus 3. Compliance.

Table of Contents

I.	Executive Summary	pgs. 3-5
	Participating Companies	pg. 3
	Key Findings	pgs. 4-5
II.	Actual vs. Expected Time Allocation	pgs. 6-7
III.	Showing the Value to Key Stakeholders	pgs. 8-12
IV.	Key Performance Indicators	pgs. 13-19
V.	Visit Frequency	pgs. 20-22
VI.	Staffing: Span of Control and Headcount	pgs. 23-25
VII.	Reasons of Change in FBMT Headcount	pgs. 26-31
VIII.	Planning Field-Based Medical Team Training	pgs. 32-37
IX.	Participant Demographics	pgs. 38-41
X.	About Best Practices, LLC	pgs. 42-43

List of Charts & Exhibits

I. Activities: Actual vs. Expected Time Allocation

Percentage difference between the actual time spent by MSLs on key activities and the expected time allocation

II. Activities: Showing the Value to Key Stakeholders

Time spent by MSLs on top ten valuable activities
Value associated with listed MSL responsibilities
Time spent by HOLs on top ten valuable activities
Value associated with listed HOL responsibilities

III. Activities: Key Performance Indicators

Comparison of usage and effectiveness of qualitative and quantitative metrics
Effectiveness of listed qualitative metrics in measuring the success of field-based medical teams
Implementation of the qualitative metrics
Effectiveness of listed quantitative metrics in measuring the success of field-based medical teams
Activities used to measure HOL and MSL performance
Implementation of the quantitative metrics

IV. Activities: Visit Frequency

Expected frequency of MSL visits to maintain old and develop new relationships with regional and national thought leaders
Expected frequency of HOL visits to maintain old and build new relationships with regional and national thought leaders

V. Staffing: Span of Control and Headcount

Number of FTEs in field-based medical team organization including MSL Directors, MSL Managers, MSLs, HOL Directors and HOLs

VI. Staffing: Reasons of Change in FBMT Headcount

Forces behind change in field-based medical team numbers
Key factors likely to cause an increase in the number of MSLs
Important factors likely to cause an increase in the number of HOLs
Key factors likely to cause a decrease in the number of MSLs
Important factors likely to cause a decrease in the number of HOLs

VII. Training: Planning Field-Based Medical Team Training

Training standardization vs customization
Frequency of MSL training in different areas
Training formats used to educate staff to increase efficiency and outreach
Time dedicated by field-based medical team organization on HOL training in different areas
Time dedicated by field-based medical team organization on MSL training in different areas