© 2010 American Public Health Association DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2008.153767
Dominick L. Frosch is with the Division of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles. Dominick L. Frosch and David Grande are with the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. David Grande is also with the Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Derjung M. Tarn is with the Department of Family Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles. Richard L. Kravitz is with the Division of General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, and the Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California, Davis. Correspondence: Correspondence should be sent to Dominick L. Frosch, Department of Health Services Research, Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, Ames Bldg, 795 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (e-mail: froschd{at}pamfri.org). Reprints can be ordered at http://www.ajph.org by clicking the "Reprints/Eprints" link.
Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs has remained controversial since regulations were liberalized by the Food and Drug Administration in 1997. We reviewed empirical evidence addressing the claims made in the policy debate for and against DTCA. This advertising has some benefits, but significant risks are evident as well, magnified by the prominence of DTCA in population-level health communications. To minimize potential harm and maximize the benefits of DTCA for population health, the quality and quantity of information should be improved to enable consumers to better self-identify whether treatment is indicated, more realistically appraise the benefits, and better attend to the risks associated with prescription drugs. We propose guidelines for improving the utility of prescription drug advertising.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||