• About
  • Contact Us
  • Log In

THE MSL

Journal of the MSL Society

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • How to Submit
  • Search Articles
  • MSL Society
  • Advertise Here

Is the “new normal” here to stay?: A Survey of Brazilian Key Opinion Leaders Preferences for Post-Covid MSL Interactions

October 19, 2021
Author(s): Ana Carolina Ferreira Cardoso, PhD, Juliana Dinéia Perez Brandão, MSL, Jessika Cristina Bridi, MSL, Natália Mesquita de Brito, M.Sc, Ph.D, Vivienne Carduz Castilho, MBA and Maura Gonzaga Lapa, B.Sc

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought profound changes in several fields. These changes mainly impacted professionals performing duties that involve relationships in the field with other people, such as Medical Science Liaisons or MSLs. These professionals were challenged to quickly adapt to the “new normal,” but are these changes here to stay? A survey of 475 Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs) based in the USA revealed a willingness to engage virtually with MSLs even beyond the pandemic [1]. To understand how Brazilian KOLs prefer to interact with MSLs when the pandemic is over, a survey was conducted by the authors across six specialties of medicine based in Brazil.

Methodology

The survey containing 10 questions was created by the authors in Microsoft Forms format and sent by email or WhatsApp between February and March 2021 to 1038 KOLs from all five Brazilian regions across six specialties. Participation was voluntary and allowed only once. Only complete surveys were included in the analysis, and a few answers were grouped to form larger groups. For the correlation analysis, 122 of the 127 respondents who had already interacted with any MSL in the pharmaceutical companies were considered.

Respondent characteristics 

The authors received 127 responses (12%) out of the 1038 KOLs that the survey had been sent to. Most respondents were from Southeast Brazil (53.5%), and 96.1% had already interacted with MSL from the pharmaceutical industry. The KOLs’ main specialties were hematology (45.7%) and oncology (33.9%); the other specialties were gynecology, cardiology, mastology, and rheumatology, which together accounted for 20.4% of the responders. Most of their time was spent in patient care (75%), while their main workplaces were private clinics (31.5%), private hospitals (24.4%), and universities (22.8%) (Table 1).

Respondent KOLs’ preferences about MSL communication

After the pandemic, more than half (54.3%) of the KOLs believed that the use of virtual communication tools should continue (Figure 1), and their preferred methods were WhatsApp (38.6%), video call (15.0%), email (14.2%), phone call (7.1%), or no preference (22.8%). Additionally, 46.5% of the responding KOLs considered that face-to-face meetings should be replaced by virtual ones, except for some situations that still require face-to-face interaction with an MSL, such as the discussion of research projects (22.0%), and first MSL visit (21.3%) (Figure 2). Moreover, 69.8% of KOLs prefer bimonthly or trimonthly interactions with MSLs. In conclusion, 51.2% of KOLs believe that virtual technology is as effective as face-to-face interactions with the MSL (Figure 3A). To investigate the relationship between this preference and the specialty of medicine, we performed a test of homogeneity comparing hematologists, oncologists/mastologists, and the less frequent specialties in our panel (gynecology, cardiology, and rheumatology). We observed that the group formed by gynecology, cardiology, and rheumatology demonstrated a trend toward face-to-face meetings, whereas oncologists and hematologists believed both were effective (Figure 3B).

Conclusion

The adaptation of the MSL role to the virtual environment has saved us time to reach more KOLs and spend it on effective training and team activities. Nevertheless, the ability to interact scientifically, gather insights, build new relationships and rapport are compromised by the virtual environment. We believe that the hybrid format comprising virtual and face-to-face interactions could still be the most preferred method among KOLs, although it should be more thoroughly investigated for each specialty. In a continental country such as Brazil, the hybrid format will improve the performance of MSL functions in terms of cost and logistics. Also, this “new normal” in the healthcare landscape is an opportunity to individualize and personalize the experience between MSLs and KOLs.

References:

[1] https://www.themsls.org/covid-19-kol-engagement-follow-up-survey/

 

Table 1. Respondent characteristics

Figure 1. After the pandemic, should MSLs continue to use virtual communication tools (Zoom, Teams, etc) in their interactions with you?

 

Figure 2. In which cases is the face-to-face meeting with an MSL irreplaceable?

Figure 3A. After the pandemic, which format of MSL meetings do you find most effective?

 

Correlation between medical specialty and preference of MSL meeting format

 

Figure 3B After the pandemic, which format of MSL meetings do you find most effective?

 

Complete survey questions

Demographics, medical training, and practice information

  1. Do you interact or have already interacted with MSL in any pharmaceutical company?
  • Yes
  • No
  • I do not know what MSL is
  • I have never received a visit from an MSL
  1. Which Brazilian region do you work in?
  • Southeast
  • Northeast
  • South
  • Midwest
  • North
  1. What is your specialty?
  • Hematology
  • Oncology
  • Rheumatology
  • Mastology
  • Cardiology
  • Gynecology/Obstetrics
  1. What is your main workplace?
  • Private clinic
  • Private hospital
  • University
  • Public hospital
  • Infusion clinic
  • Research Center
  1. What activity do you spend most of your time on?
  • Patient care
  • Research
  • Teaching activities
  • Preceptorship
  • Administrative activities

Preferences regarding communication with MSL

  1. After the pandemic, should MSLs continue to use virtual communication tools (Zoom, Teams, etc.) in their interactions with you?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Depends on the purpose of the meeting
  1. After the pandemic, which format of MSL meetings do you find most effective?
  • Both (virtual and face-to-face) are effective
  • Virtual (Zoom, WebEx, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet, phone calls)
  • Face-to-face meetings
  • I have no interest in communicating with an MSL
  1. In which case is a face-to-face meeting with an MSL irreplaceable?
  • Face-to-face meetings should be replaced by virtual meetings
  • In discussion of research projects
  • In the first MSL visit
  • Routine visits
  1. How often do you prefer to communicate with an MSL?
  • Every two months
  • Every three months
  • Once a month
  • Every 15 days
  • Once a week
  • I have no interest in communicating with an MSL
  1. Which virtual tool do you prefer to communicate with an MSL?
  • WhatsApp
  • Video calls
  • E-mail
  • Phone calls
  • All mentioned above
  • I have no interest in communicating with an MSL

Author: 

Ana Carolina Ferreira Cardoso, PhD

Bachelor of Biology at Federal University of São Carlos (2011), Master of Science and Ph.D. at Faculty of Medicine of the University of São Paulo/ICESP (2014), and international internship at MD Anderson Cancer Center (2018). Specialist in Oncology, having worked with molecular oncology and tumor microenvironment. Currently a Medical Science Liaison (MSL) Leader at Libbs Pharmaceuticals and responsible for the assistance and management of the MSL team.

Juliana Dinéia Perez Brandão, PhD

Bachelor and licentiate of Biology at Universidade Ibirapuera and Universidade Cidade de São Paulo (2002), Master (2006) and PhD (2009) in Science in Nephrology Division at Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Postdoctoral in Science (2013) and Translational Medicine (2018) at Universidade Federal de São Paulo.  Specialist in Nephrology and Science, having worked with biomarkers of kidney renal transplantation with proteomic and metabolomic techniques. Currently a Medical Science Liaison (MSL) in the Gynecology division at Libbs Pharmaceutical.

Jessika Cristina Bridi, PhD

Bachelor of Pharmacy at Federal University of Santa Maria (2011), MSc in Molecular Medicine at Federal University of Minas Gerais (2014), and PhD in Neuroscience at Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience of King’s College London (2018); focusing on the mechanisms underlying neurodegenerative disorders and neuroinflammation. Currently acts as a hematology MSL at Libbs Pharmaceutical in Brazil.

Natália Mesquita de Brito, MSc, PhD

Currently acts as Medical Science Liaison (MSL) at Libbs Pharmaceutical in Brazil. Bachelor of Biology, M.Sc (2015), with international internship at Faculté de Pharmacie of Université de Montréal, and Ph.D in biosciences at Rio de Janeiro State University (2019). Prior to her work in the industry, she had experience working with inflammation, cell biology, tumor microenvironment, and immunometabolism.

Vivienne Carduz Castilho, MBA

Bachelor in pharmacy, Vivienne has more than 20 years of experience in the pharmaceutical industry, in medical affairs and clinical research departments, focusing on team management, support, leadership and training, workload planning and logistic, metrics, results presentation, and performance assessment. Currently acts as Clinical Research Manager at Libbs Pharmaceutical in Brazil.

Maura Gonzaga Lapa, BSc 

Bachelor in Statistician in the University of São Paulo (2004), Maura has 15 years of experience in biostatistics in the pharmaceutical industry, in medical affairs and clinical research. Currently acts as Clinical Research Specialist at Libbs Pharmaceutical in Brazil.

Have an opinion on this article? Send a message to the editor.

Latest MSL Jobs

See All Jobs

MSL Society Newsletter - Exclusive Insights

Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2023 · The MSL - Journal of the Medical Science Liaison Society