PHARMA FIRMS MAY HOLD HIRING OF FIELD STAFF

AWAIT CLARITY ON CENTRE’S GENERICS PUSH WILL WRITE TO PMO ON ALLOWING PATIENTS TO CHOOSE

Thanks to the latest generic-generic drugs push by the Prime Minister, pharmaceutical majors are likely to halt recruiting field sales representatives, at least for the moment. If doctors prescribe chemical or generic names of pharmaceutical molecules instead of brand names, field sales personnel might become near-redundant. SOHINI DAS writes

Due to the latest generic-generic drugs push by the prime minister, pharmaceutical majors are likely to put recruitment of fresh field sales personnel on hold, at least for the moment.

If doctors prescribe chemical or generic names of pharmaceutical molecules instead of brand names, field sales personnel would likely become near-redundant.

There are an estimated 300,000 such people in this sector. And, 800850 more are usually recruited by pharma companies across India every month, said N Sivakumar, business head at recruitment entity TeamLease Services.

“Pharma players are waiting for more clarity on the situation,” he said. The attrition rate in this cadre is high, at 25-30 per cent, and, thus, the recruitment process is continuous.

The chief of a leading domestic pharma company, with significant international presence, said: “If doctors are barred from prescribing brand names altogether, there would be no need to have a medical representative. One would then only deal with wholesalers and stockists, and negotiate on margins.” Asking not to be identified, he hoped doctors would be allowed to mention brand names in prescriptions, apart from the generic ones, thus, leaving the choice with the patient. In such a situation, no major change of strategy would be required, he added.

Every big pharma firm employs between 3,000 and 6,000 personnel in the field force. “It primarily depends on how many therapy segments one is present in, and what is the growth target,” said the business head of cardiology of a pharma major based in this city. A human resources official in another city-based leading pharma house, too, confirmed that companies were indeed wary of more hiring at present.

The Union health ministry had recently asked the medical community to adhere to a 2016 notification by the Medical Council of India, asking doctors to prescribe medicines by generic names and in clear handwriting, preferably in capital letters.

Pharma associations, however, are planning to also push for inclusion of brand names in a prescription.

S V Veeramani, president of the Indian Drug Manufacturers’ Association, said they planned to write to the Prime Minister’s Office next week in this regard. “At present, there is not enough stock for genericgeneric medicines in the Indian market, and patients may face difficulties, in case prescriptions mention only generic names,” he said. Adding that as such, India was largely a brandedgenerics market.

The share of branded generics in the domestic market is around 96 per cent, said D G Shah, secretary-general of the Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance, representing domestic drugmakers. Of the major pharma firms, Lupin and Cipla make generic-generic medicines, apart from half a dozen others, claim industry sources.

“The main intention behind the prime minister’s point is that the poor should have access to medicines. If that issue can be addressed, we should not ideally erode the brand equity of our pharma industry,” Shah said. He explained that several importers (mainly from African nations) go by established brand names. And, pushing the entire industry to genericgeneric would, in the long run, harm the export potential of branded generics from India.

Generic medicines are a bioequivalent to a brand name product in dosage, strength, route of administration, quality, performance and intended use.

Both Shah and Veeramani agree there is also the issue of lack of bioequivalence studies in this space. “We are trying to follow a US model, where a large section of the market lies with patented products, and bioequivalence studies are done comparing with a patented molecule,” said Veeramani.

He further explained that in India, however, which is a branded-generics market, bioequivalence could at best be done with a leading product. However, a leading brand could be using different active pharmaceutical ingredients at different times, depending on availability and costs. This makes bioequivalence studies difficult.

Meanwhile, the trade wants a 50 per cent margin for generic-generic medicines, against an approximately 30 per cent margin in branded generics, Shah said. Abhay Kumar, president of the Indian Pharmacist Association, confirmed this. “We welcome the government’s initiative. However, it would take time to move from branded generics to genericgenerics,” he said.

There are a million registered pharmacists in India and around 100,000 are added every year. In comparison, there are around 600,000 stockists and wholesalers of medicines; the number of retailers is far higher. A pharmacist needs to be present at every retail outlet to dispense medicines in line with the new directive, which is a practical problem.

Jan Aushadhi stores, a central government initiative to sell generic medicines, sell around 600 medicines, against 4,000-odd combinations sold in India. There were 861 Jan Aushadhi stores as of March 2017. The initiative has not taken off in the way the government would have expected. Mails sent to the department of pharmaceuticals on procurement plans remained unanswered.