Close

Pharmaceutical outsourcing partner predicts AI and dialogue cues will assist HCP engagement

Note* - All images used are for editorial and illustrative purposes only and may not originate from the original news provider or associated company.

Related stories

When to Bring in Outside Help for FDA Cybersecurity Compliance (and What to Look For)

Medical device cybersecurity has become too important to treat...

Billerud Introduces New Pharmaceutical Packaging Option

Billerud has officially introduced PharmaKraft, a specialized fibre-based packaging...

AstraZeneca Advances AI Drug Discovery Deal with insitro

AstraZeneca has inked a billion-dollar AI drug discovery partnership...
- Advertisement -

How can pharmaceutical companies leverage digital to engage HCPs in a complex healthcare environment?

Digital transformation has been the leading topic of discussion in most industries this year, and healthcare is no exception. Although, it would be unfair to dismiss the industry’s gradual shift in attitude, which has been occurring for over a decade now.

At least that is the view of Kevin Lennon, Business Unit Director of Star OUTiCO, a pharmaceutical outsourcing service and resourcing partner with experience spanning ten years in digital capability.

Here, Lennon discusses how pharmaceutical companies can better engage HCPs to maximise performance and sales results by leveraging advancements in the technologies available to them and integrating a wider range of remote channels with their sales teams.

Despite the industry’s gradual digital shift, like many industries, offerings via digital channels have become a requirement due to the COVID-19 pandemic and its subsequent disruption to service.

Change has been forced upon on us, but as many have already found, it’s not all bad. Rather, there have been many benefits of digital adoption, some of which are solving issues the industry has been facing for years. Namely, improving HCP engagement.

The digital age

Prior to the pandemic, an increasing number of HCPs were beginning to prefer digital mediums for consuming and engaging with messages and content. And it makes perfect sense as to why this might have been the case, even before restrictions were placed on face-to-face meetings and events.

We need only to think of our own consumption behaviours, most of which occur online now. We’re in a digital age, where all the information we could possibly need is available right at our fingertips. All it takes is a click, scroll or impression.

Ultimately, there is greater acceptance and now, even an expectation, for digital options from organisations. And as the new, younger generation of HCPs begin to take over, this will only intensify.

The industry needs to keep up. Dabbling in digital is no longer sufficient, and instead, companies must devise clear strategies that integrate online offerings and leverage technology in order to meet the needs of this new age of healthcare professionals.

Above the noise

So, as more and more pharmaceutical organisations make the digital switch with their content and communications, HCPs are finding themselves with a vast choice of options. This creates a challenge for the pharmaceutical provider as in order to get messages and products out there, they must capture healthcare professionals’ attention by breaking through the noise.

Overcoming this issue is perhaps one of the greatest benefits of a digital approach. By nature, digital activities can produce and harness large amounts of data and information, which when analysed and interpreted, can become meaningful insight. This insight can then be used to justify and inform future decisions.

When it comes to HCP engagement, this insight is incredibly powerful. It can help pharmaceutical companies to understand the type of information HCPs consume best, where they consume it and when.

Tools, such as our AXiOM system, provide insights that go into incredible depths. For instance, the collection of data could clearly show you that HCP X engages with pharmaceutical industry content at 11am, and through email communications or, that HCP Y engages better out of hours, and via information provided on a microsite.

With this knowledge, pharmaceutical organisations are equipped with everything they need to create more personal and effective interactions with HCPs. As well as boosting engagement, this makes the job of sales teams more efficient, with less time wasted on unsuccessful efforts. We call this Intelligent Brand Engagement which allows us to tailor content via In-Person or Remote Digital Engagement.

The future of the pharmaceutical industry

We’re already seeing how digital transformation is benefiting the industry and we expect this to continue. It’s highly unlikely that pharmaceutical organisations will revert back to old methods when engaging with HCPs, but instead, offer Omni-Channel options that satisfy the needs of all, and maximise touchpoints for increased awareness and effect. A successful future, therefore, will require the industry to leverage the benefits of both online and offline contact. The customer journey (which will be different for every brand) requires Engagement Specialists being able to orchestrate In-Person and Remote Digital activities.

There is also opportunity to diversify content offerings. This year we’ve experienced the success of webinars and virtual events, which HCPs can attend without having to take too much time out of their day. Remote training has also proven beneficial, and is a trend being driven by GPs and clinicians who are requesting the more convenient online sessions.

It’s likely that technology will continue to evolve and help the industry overcome even more of its challenges. Engagement can always be improved, but the way in which technology can help will only get more innovative.

For example, although AI and machine learning are still in their infancy when it comes to HCP engagement, recent advancements have allowed us to utilise digital software to such an extent whereby verbal cues and dialogue are assessed while sales reps speak to HCPs. Data will then go on to inform training content, in order to equip teams with the most effective communication skills.

The ultimate goal is for the data and insights gathered from the increasing amount of digital activity to be able to support the daily decisions of sales teams. For example, if a rep experiences a last minute meeting cancellation, the digital system in place should be able to offer them alternative HCPs to contact, who are most likely to engage at this time, and through this medium. It saves time and resources and creates a more favourable HCP experience.

Global pandemic or not, the healthcare environment will always continue to evolve and change. We simply cannot stand still. We need to constantly adapt how we engage with HCPs and meet their individual needs.

To overcome the market’s current complexities, there is a clear need to be broader in our thinking and smarter in how we engage by using every bit of insight available to improve a HCP’s overall experience with a pharmaceutical organisation, in order to support them in achieving better patient outcomes. After all, that’s a goal that will never change.

Never miss a pharmaceutical headline

The pharmaceutical industry moves fast – stay on top of it with our must - read briefings.

  • The top pharma and life sciences stories, straight to your inbox
  • The biggest news, features, interviews, and analysis
  • Dedicated coverage of the key developments driving the global pharmaceutical sector

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access the Media Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Latest stories

Related stories

When to Bring in Outside Help for FDA Cybersecurity Compliance (and What to Look For)

Medical device cybersecurity has become too important to treat...

Billerud Introduces New Pharmaceutical Packaging Option

Billerud has officially introduced PharmaKraft, a specialized fibre-based packaging...

AstraZeneca Advances AI Drug Discovery Deal with insitro

AstraZeneca has inked a billion-dollar AI drug discovery partnership...

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access theMedia Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Translate »