Pharma Misses the Mark with Hispanics

The Hispanic/Latino population in the U. S. is one of the quickest growing and Spanish is the second most-common language in the U.S after English. According to the 2009 American Community Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, Spanish is the primary language spoken at home by over 35.5 million people aged 5 or older. There are 45 million Hispanics who speak Spanish as a first or second language and there are 6 million Spanish students making it the world's second-largest Spanish-speaking community. The implications are that all major aspects of life are conducted in Spanish. The impact of language is significant in the health care arena where communication is the key to successful outcomes.

A recent national survey of physicians conducted by KCI Partners and the Jeffrey Group revealed that U.S. pharmaceutical companies communicate poorly with Hispanic/Latino audiences. The ratings showed the lowest possible scores with 33% of the physicians stating that only 7% communicate “very well” with Latino/Hispanic patients. On a scale of one to seven – with seven being the highest positive rating – 24% of doctors gave pharma a three for communication ability, and another 24% gave pharma a four. There are clearly some issues that could include lack of cultural knowledge combined with language barriers. By this scale, pharma appears to miss the mark.

The sheer numbers of Hispanic/Latino growth is indicative of health care needs increasing along with rising trends in diabetes and some cancers. Although the health care crisis continues to expand for this group due to lack of access and limited insurance, it remains questionable whether health care reform will impact this population. In the meantime, there are specific actions that can be employed to reduce disparity. First, pharma could invest in how to communicate better with Hispanic/Latino patients as this market will continue to grow. There are ways to communicate better. Culturally relevance and language are crucial. Second, communication between pharma and the Hispanic/Latino patient could make a difference in millions of lives. Pharma can still make the grade.

New Generations More Adept With Technology

Everyone knows that each generation has specific characteristics that involve all aspects of life including how they obtain health information. Generation X grew up with the development of computers and remains constant users of technology. The Internet Generation (also known as the Millennial Generation or Generation Y finds great ease and comfort in communicating via technology. Instant communication is a way of life and they are online 24/7 either emailing, text-messaging or enjoying online technology. Now here comes Generation Z who has only known technology their entire lives and has even become dependent on it since it is available in their own pocket. They are indeed the ‘immediate need’ generation. What does this say about the future of utilizing mobile apps for global health care needs?

A recent study by Euro RSCG tonic demonstrates percentages of common virtual users in the U.S. It seems that the most receptive individuals to online health care are those with chronic illnesses, more affluent and younger generations. About 50% of the respondents use mobile apps to run do it yourself (DIY) tests at home and monitor their own symptoms. These patients have much to gain by way of convenience and low cost. This high number of users will inevitably increase worldwide as more users realize these benefits. This is a win-win for physicians who can be more efficient due to time constraints and patients who will receive personalized care. Although the study focused on 1,000 U. S. online users, it is noteworthy to recall that Eastern cultures often follow Western culture patterns.

This change in health care usage is correlated to generational shifting. Already half of the new generations (X, Y & Z) are comfortable with virtual health visits compared to Baby Boomers at almost 40%. These newer generations from around the globe will drive remote health care even further. Their different mindset will make it more likely that they will increasingly use technology to serve their health care needs. This will transform global health care delivery. After all, this is the Internet Generation.

(MUR)

High Standards Remain Necessary in Language Translation

There is a lot to be said about technology and language. For example, the Chinese language is quickly gaining speed by the number of users in the world (second most spoken language in the world next to English as first and Spanish as third). Technology has come a long way and one can now look up words online in just about any language and you can even communicate albeit in a loose way. You can get the gist of the topic at hand, but not implicit information that makes a difference in one’s life. However, there is one exception in digital communication when it comes to technology translation. Health care communication needs to be precise. It is this accuracy that makes it valuable. It is just too important to have personal information be translated by technology in a verbatim way.

First, technology translation about health is private, individual and unique to the patient. It could be a difference of life vs. death, healthy living vs. poor habits or knowledge vs. ignorance. No one can negate the intimacy of communication between a health care provider and a patient where health care is concerned. Technology translation cannot possibly fulfill patient needs in a personalized way. Preciseness is necessary in this case.

There is no question that technology translation has much to offer all industries around the world. We are not quite there for communication about health care matters. Computers may be experts in word translation, but not effective human communication. It is projected that technology translation will not be perfect, merely adequate. Now these applications are often considered “passable”. This is fine for general information or basic business, but not delicate matters with the potential to impact health. Therefore, we still need to rely on medical translation firms who specialize in high quality language standards. Just ask yourself. If you were in China, would you trust your personal health needs to a technology translation application? How about if the words were passable?

(MUR)

Pharma Can Fill This Order

It is no secret that physicians worldwide have demanding schedules round the clock. They often have limited time since they have to first see their patients who come to their offices, make rounds in hospitals and stay abreast of medical information that makes them competent. Of course, there are many other tasks to accomplish for this complicated role in medicine.

This leaves little room for digital communication with their patients who need to know more about their illness or medication. Not only is this a patient need, it has become a craving for patients throughout the world. A recent study conducted by MedTera revealed that 95% of patients require more comprehensive information to manage their disease, learn about their illness or manage their medication. New studies are underway to determine useful tools to help patients. In the meantime, this is an opportunity for pharma to fill the void by providing valuable information particularly for the global patient who has additional needs related to language and culture.

All patients have unique concerns about their individual health. If they are not managing their disease or learning about an illness, they are working on prevention efforts such as altering their lifestyle and learning how to live a more healthy life. The global patient profile is a patient that speaks another language and requires information in a culturally sensitive manner so that it makes sense, is useful and makes an impact right away. Yes, one has to take time to figure out effective means of communication with the global patient. Pharma already has a strong knowledge base about comprehensive health information to meet the global patients’ needs. Furthermore, they have the resources at their fingertips to translate materials in a culturally appropriate way. If patients are hungry for more, who says that pharma cannot fill this order?

(MUR)

Social Networks for Medicine Require Extra Caution

How do patients determine reliable social networks to help them make good life choices about their health? The answer is complex because there seems to be no warning when it comes to medicine and social networks. Therefore, patients who access social networks for medicine would be well-advised to proceed with extra caution. The endless worldwide web of medical information could be misleading especially for patients who place trust in social networking. More importantly, patients who speak other languages are at greater risk for trusting online information that may be false or misleading. There is more reason to be cautious.

A study underwritten by CVS Caremark and published online in the Journal of General Internal Medicine determined that the fifteen (15) largest Facebook communities for diabetes patients and caregivers promoted clinical studies of unapproved products. The reported rate of 25% shows that not all sources are trustworthy. Patients who speak other languages suffering from pain or an illness may fall prey to such sites. In addition, these sites had unconfirmed identities, which raises serious red flags. This may be only somewhat evident for English speakers who navigate social networks frequently. However, non-English speaking patients searching for online social support are even more vulnerable. They are hopeful they will find relief via support systems who share similarities even across language barriers. Online stumbles upon less than reliable sources may expose these patients to potential harm.

It is already a challenge for patients to decipher endless volumes of online information. It is crucial to caution patients who speak other languages to ensure social network medicine sites have validity and can be trusted. We need to spread the word in other languages to raise awareness that all sites may not hold the patients’ best interest in mind nor do they all necessarily provide the best medicinal support. How does a patient know what is safe? Who sets the standards? Where is the warning label?

MUR