Innovation is key to success in any industry, but especially in the pharma industry where new drugs and treatments are constantly being developed. However, pharma companies are often hesitant to be innovative and take risks that could impact their regulatory approval. This fear has been adopted by PharmaTech companies who worry that their products wouldn’t be adopted by pharma companies if they deviate too far from the norm. The impact of this fear is far-reaching, with one of the most significant impacts being on patient experiences in clinical trials.
Are UX teams focusing on the wrong users?
PharmaTech companies are under immense pressure to develop products that meet the needs of all stakeholders in the clinical trial journey; patients, sites, and study teams. However, it is often the case that UX teams within these companies focus their efforts on designing for patients, with sites being an afterthought, if they are considered at all. This is understandable to some extent, as patients are ultimately the ones taking the medication or using the technology. However, sites play a vital role in getting patients into clinical trials and ensuring that they comply with the trial requirements. If sites are not comfortable using the software or find it too difficult to complete tasks such as enrolling patients, then this will have a knock-on effect on patient experience.
Lack of focus on the user experience of sites often results in them having to navigate multiple different platforms and user interfaces. They may need to work with several different variations and pieces of software that are unsynchronised and disjointed. It can be an uncomfortable and frustrating experience for site staff.
sites often complain that they feel ignored when new software and processes are introduced. A Clinical Site Relationship Partner reported that “the greatest paint point for sites is the lack of TRUE site support.”
As they struggle with outdated and inefficient products, there is a consistent breakdown of processes between various parties. This has a negative impact on enrollment processes and patient experience which inevitably affects the success of the trial. The fact is, trials don’t have to be as difficult to enroll or execute, but all parties must have a voice and BE HEARD.
Industry buzzwords about patient centricity are constantly thrown around, but to truly achieve this, sites must be equipped with the right tools and support. While the patient experience is important, the site staff are also key stakeholders in getting the software into the hands of the patient. User experience and design should be rethought by PharmaTech companies so that sites are listened to and collaborated with.
Can things be done differently?
PharmaTech companies want to be innovative and differentiated - but only as long as they are not the only ones doing it. They want and need to be different, but also feel compelled to stay within the norms of what is acceptable. Finding the balance between being innovative and meeting regulations is an ongoing challenge in this industry. We all know patient experience needs to improve, but how can we make that a reality?
The fear of groundbreaking innovation in PharmaTech means that a vast amount of the technology being used looks and feels outdated, as though the industry has been stuck in a time warp, whilst the rest of the technology world has moved on. Outside of healthcare, users are accustomed to using sleek, user-friendly apps that make their lives easier. Apps like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram are used daily, and not only sustain user interest but have been developed to have a ‘stickiness’ factor – they are hard to give up! When they are faced with using clinical trial software, patients, sites and even study teams are often unimpressed with the appearance and feel of the software, as well as its functionality. This can lead to a feeling of being ‘forced’ to use the software and a lack of engagement with it.
This is not to take away from the challenges faced by PharmaTech companies in design development. Regulatory hurdles such as ensuring quality, data security & privacy, traceability, and adherence to procedures for the QMS (Quality Management System), are just some of the key considerations. However, these challenges should not be used as an excuse for failing to innovate and provide a better user experience. With the right approach, it is possible to meet all the requirements and still provide a good user experience.
Opportunities for change
Whilst it is true that pharma companies can be quite conservative when it comes to innovation, this does not mean that they are averse to it altogether. In fact, many pharma companies are actively searching for new and innovative products that can improve patient outcomes. However, PharmaTech providers may be hesitant to provide certain solutions to pharma companies, in fear that the products may not be well received or may not meet all the regulatory requirements.
This makes it difficult for pharma companies to understand what technology is available, and how it can be used to improve results. Pharma companies miss vital opportunities to improve their own processes because of this.
PharmaTech providers need to make more innovative decisions in order to stay ahead of the curve, and also meet the constantly changing needs of patients. The use of agile design and rapid prototyping is key in overcoming the fear of breaking new ground because it allows for new products to be validated and tested more quickly. High fidelity prototypes can make it possible for pharma company stakeholders to assess regulatory impact, much earlier in the product development process than has been possible in the past. This means that any potential problems can be identified and addressed early on, saving time and money in the long run. When combined with user-testing that focuses on site staff as well as, patients and caregivers, PharmaTech providers can be sure that their products will be well-received across all stakeholders in the clinical trial process.
Breaking ground in PharmaTech doesn't need to be a scary proposition. There are many opportunities for change and innovation within the industry, but they need to be seized. And there are ways to do so without compromising on quality or regulatory compliance, and without losing out on business.
