PAs working in pharma, med device, healthcare technology?

[schrecky]

I couldn't find anything meaningful after searching the forum so I'm creating a new thread.

 

I entered PA school with a MBA and experience in the pharmaceutical industry. I graduate in August and was wondering if any PAs are working in the pharma, med device, home healthcare, or healthcare IT industry in a PA role of some sort. I was considering working in industry again and possibly doing ER/EMS work part time. Anyone in this environment?

 

Tim

[SocialMedicine]

I know of 2 PAs in the business sector right now. As a PA, especially with an MBA and clinical experience, you are very marketable. I would not look for a device or drug rep position, rather levels above - whatever that may be. It is def possible to have a business position and then work part time in the Eemrgency Dept. As a new grad it is always hard to start off part time. If you "just" were to work part time in the ED 1 day a week I imagine it would take years before you really felt comfortable and in command. Not sure what a PA would do in EMS. Do you have any interest in working in healthcare mgmt? Perhaps you could find a dual position.

[schrecky]

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I worked in the pharma industry for 17 years and when I was laid off I decided to go back to clinical medicine (I've been a paramedic for 25+ years,) so considering going back into industry would be a little hypocritical on my part. That said, working in industry can be very financially rewarding and the developments in healthcare and home healthcare technologies may bring great opportunities. I guess I'm having a "have my cake and eat it too" moment, but it would be great to find a gig as a PA that would satisfy both interests.

[schrecky]

Hello again... this is a bump from last year. I've been in practice (emergency medicine) for a little over a year now and very much enjoy the work. I'm still curious, however, what roles PAs are taking outside of clinical medicine. I'm particularly interested to know if anyone is working in pharma, biotech, med device, or healthcare IT. Any thoughts/experiences?

[bobuddy]

Two of my friends that are/were PA's lost their jobs this summer and could not find local positions.  They are now both working for GSK and seem pretty happy overall.  They both tell me that they are making more now than they could make as a PA (in our area) and benefits seem to be really good. 

[discogenic]

Two of my friends that are/were PA's lost their jobs this summer and could not find local positions.  They are now both working for GSK and seem pretty happy overall.  They both tell me that they are making more now than they could make as a PA (in our area) and benefits seem to be really good. 

 

When a PA takes a job in pharma or industry, do they end up doing the usual drug-rep thing, or does being a PA offer some advantage?

[ventana]

When a PA takes a job in pharma or industry, do they end up doing the usual drug-rep thing, or does being a PA offer some advantage?

 

 

all you have to do is sell your soul and morals.....

 

sorry, just my feelings about the entire industry

[schrecky]

How do you explain to your patients that you don't write prescriptions? Because doing so would be patronizing that soul-less and moral-less industry.

 

I get your point, though. Pharma was once a highly respected industry until the early 90's, when it became more about marketing flash than science. The movie "Love, and Other Drugs" made that point prominent. It's true that many reps adopted "situational ethics" when it came to detailing the drugs, but there were just as many providers (docs, PAs, and NPs) that had no problem accepting the love! That chapter of pharma is closing quickly and the companies seem to be slowly returning to their scientific roots, which is a good thing.

 

It think that it is only fair to point out that these same shenanigans were going on with just about every other healthcare product industry. Medical device, biotech, imaging companies, hospital products, etc. For some reason, pharma was pilloried for these practices while the other groups mostly got a pass.

 

The pharmaceutical and biotech industries produce medications that allow people with chronic diseases to live longer, healthier lives, despite their poor habits and lack of personal responsibility. The industry has a lot to offer in terms of outcomes research, new product discovery, and patient assistance.  I think it's perfectly reasonable to listen to the pitch, do your own research, and write what you think is best for the patient.

[tunafish]

It is clear to me that soul selling problem can exist in a setting when a doc, PA or NP's only source of education comes from a drug rep pitch over a medium rare rack of lamb. There are plenty of people who lead this way of life. Yes, pharma is profit driven, but so is every doc and hospital. If not for science we would still teach blood letting and leaches in med schools, right?

[bobuddy]

From what I am told - their salary is no longer determined by the amount of sales - they are paid a base salary and then bonuses come via test taking and demonstration of product knowledge.  GSK got their hands slapped a few years back and it seems they are attempting to change the perception of drug reps and the heavy handed sales pitch that they are known for.    But, take into account this is an "n" of two people in one company.  

 

I think they were hired with the company because of their medical background - and maybe the company thinks that a sales pitch from a medical person would have more weight than if it came from a blonde former cheerleader in a short skirt - sorry - it seems that is the norm around here :)

[Remster825]

From what I am told - their salary is no longer determined by the amount of sales - they are paid a base salary and then bonuses come via test taking and demonstration of product knowledge. GSK got their hands slapped a few years back and it seems they are attempting to change the perception of drug reps and the heavy handed sales pitch that they are known for. But, take into account this is an "n" of two people in one company.

 

I think they were hired with the company because of their medical background - and maybe the company thinks that a sales pitch from a medical person would have more weight than if it came from a blonde former cheerleader in a short skirt - sorry - it seems that is the norm around here :)

As a current Pharma sales rep who is applying to PA school to get out of this 'soul sucking' industry myself, I can tell you that we are all still paid bonuses based on sales alone, and not any other metric. Pharma has not changed over the past decade and just seeks to reap as much money as possible out of individuals and the system by pretending to "care deeply" about the needs of the patient. If there is no money to be made in a specific sector or if that money has run dry, they go elsewhere. Can't wait to be done with this industry and never look back!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tunafish]

As a current Pharma sales rep who is applying to PA school to get out of this 'soul sucking' industry myself, I can tell you that we are all still paid bonuses based on sales alone, and not any other metric. Pharma has not changed over the past decade and just seeks to reap as much money as possible out of individuals and the system by pretending to "care deeply" about the needs of the patient. If there is no money to be made in a specific sector or if that money has run dry, they go elsewhere. Can't wait to be done with this industry and never look back!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Like you would avoid it in medicine. There are people who "care deeply" in the hospital and there is a CFO of the hospital who cares about bottom line and trust me he will rape and kill to improve that line because... guess what... his bonus depends on it. And lots of PAs on this forum were talking about performance bonuses for the amount of ptx seen and procedures done. i think you can be honest to yourself and that integrity matters the most.

[ventana]

How do you explain to your patients that you don't write prescriptions? Because doing so would be patronizing that soul-less and moral-less industry.

 

 

at what point in time did I say that I did not write prescriptions?  This has nothing to do with writing prescriptions.  This has everything to do with it, PA working for a Pharma company.

 

The data strongly supports the drug reps influence prescribing patterns.  Why else do Pharma companies pay billions of dollars on advertising?  It's not because they want to support the advertising companies.

 

 

 

 

I think you need to reread my post to understand.  Yes, I write generic drugs over name brands, yes I will not write a drug within one year of introduction, yes I preferentially switch people off namebrand drugs that others have started yet.  The patient can't afford.  No I do not apologize to my patients for writing prescriptions, there's only a few professions in the world that are allowed to do this and we are one of them.

[schrecky]

Umm...that was my apparently ineffective attempt at sarcasm. 

 

My point was that it is hypocritical to lambaste pharmaceutical companies for attempting promote their products, and yet validate their value by prescribing those same products to patients that YOU have determined, need them. I always find it funny when clinicians brag about prescribing generics over branded products as a swipe against the pharmaceutical industry. Who do you think makes those generics? Often it's the generic business units of those same companies! And who do you think discovered those generic drugs? The evil, soul-less drug companies!

 

I'm not absolving the pharma industry for the sins they committed, especially in the last two decades, but to suggest that they are not an important part of your patient's path to well-being is ridiculous. Finding drugs and bringing them to market is pretty damn expensive, often >$700 million from bench to trench. The patent life on drugs is seventeen years, and the clock starts ticking once the molecule is patented, not when it hits the streets. If these companies are not able to make a return on their investments, who will be discovering the next Lipitor, or Plavix, or most importantly, Viagra!

 

I prescribe plenty of generics every day, and I am sensitive to patients ability to pay for drugs. But keep in mind that if the drug companies had not invested the time and effort to bring these molecules to the market (and charge what the market feels is a "fair price"), you would have no generics to prescribe!

[GetMeOuttaThisMess]

To get back on topic here, I have interviewed with a nationwide occ. med group for an EMR/IT position that specifically listed being a MLP as one of the criteria.  I interviewed back in August and was continuously led to believe that I would be hearing something positive "shortly".  In the end, following several "staying in touch" emails, I was told that they had made other selections.  I wish that I knew what my downfall had been since I would still like to try the position (they recently re-posted the position and I went ahead and re-applied but don't expect to hear anything).  I also know that an EMR group based out of Dallas that EMEDPA likes for EM documentation has used MLP's in the past as well (I did a short consultation stint with them when they were working out the bugs on their electronic version while still working PT EM).  I can't speak for others but I do know that my motivation to move into such an arena is that my gas tank is empty with regard to direct, chronic patient care.  I'm not a salesperson so I couldn't do pharm sales.

[ventana]

Umm...that was my apparently ineffective attempt at sarcasm. 

 

My point was that it is hypocritical to lambaste pharmaceutical companies for attempting promote their products, and yet validate their value by prescribing those same products to patients that YOU have determined, need them. I always find it funny when clinicians brag about prescribing generics over branded products as a swipe against the pharmaceutical industry. Who do you think makes those generics? Often it's the generic business units of those same companies! And who do you think discovered those generic drugs? The evil, soul-less drug companies!

 

I'm not absolving the pharma industry for the sins they committed, especially in the last two decades, but to suggest that they are not an important part of your patient's path to well-being is ridiculous. Finding drugs and bringing them to market is pretty damn expensive, often >$700 million from bench to trench. The patent life on drugs is seventeen years, and the clock starts ticking once the molecule is patented, not when it hits the streets. If these companies are not able to make a return on their investments, who will be discovering the next Lipitor, or Plavix, or most importantly, Viagra!

 

I prescribe plenty of generics every day, and I am sensitive to patients ability to pay for drugs. But keep in mind that if the drug companies had not invested the time and effort to bring these molecules to the market (and charge what the market feels is a "fair price"), you would have no generics to prescribe!

 

 

it was not about prescribing, it was about working for them

 

I still don't see you logic there - this is about a provider working for Pharma.

 

I also disagree with you that the sins of Pharma are in the past, they continue today. they are now just further in the closet.

 

also,, has consistently been the top revenue-producing, profiteering, return on investment sector in the entire stock market.  This is on the backs of the working people who get prescribed very expensive drugs when a generic would do.  This in turn is driven by effective marketing to healthcare providers.  Marketing works.  Ignorance or claiming that it does not affect you is not a defense.  I do not do drug rep lunches, I do not have samples, I do not write namebrand drugs unless there is simply no alternative.  I do however take offense at your defense of the farm industry, did you know that most of the R&D costs are subsidized by the federal government?  Did you know that before most drugs go generic.  The company will sue any generic manufacturer to extend the patent anywhere from 3 to 10 years.  

 

A provider/PA/NP/doc working for Pharma is selling your soul.

 

 

pharmaceutical development should not be at the sole discretion of profit, Pharma companies overcharge even the largest insurance companies by approximately 30%, we know this because the VA was successful at reducing drug costs at least 30% when they negotiated a formulary.  Medicare part D was simply a handout of more profit to drug companies as it did not allow the government to negotiate drug prices.

 

Simply because a drug company comes up with a new drug does not make it an angelic enterprise.

 

 

to the original poster, keeping it on track, I for one would not want to work for a pharmacology company, I to have an MBA and extensive business background and the more I learned of the business world the less I liked it.  Maybe times are changing, but I know where I belong.

[schrecky]

"I also disagree with you that the sins of Pharma are in the past, they continue today. they are now just further in the closet."

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "further in the closet." The pharma industry has drastically overhauled their marketing practices. The "give-aways" and no-show speaker events are gone. The junkets and high honoraria for "speaker training" has been drastically cut back. All expenditures >$10 are now reported and speakers are required to announce their industry ties prior to any sponsored lecture. I think pharma has come a long way from the past two decades.

 

"also,, has consistently been the top revenue-producing, profiteering, return on investment sector in the entire stock market. "  

 

So what? There business, that's the expectation of the share holders.

 

"This is on the backs of the working people who get prescribed very expensive drugs when a generic would do." 

 

I have no problem with prescribing generic drugs where it's appropriate. I'm sensitive to the fact that some folks are unable to afford branded drugs, but most of the pharma companies have drug discount programs to help out those who qualify. I find it maddening that some of my patients have the audacity to complain about their $4 per day pharma expense, and then leave my ED to purchase their daily $8 per pack cigarettes. It's always more convenient to blame someone else for your problems that face your own.

 

 

"I do not do drug rep lunches, I do not have samples, I do not write namebrand drugs unless there is simply no alternative."

 

That's fine. I don't think having lunches, accepting samples, or writing name brand drugs makes you de facto corrupt provider, though. 

 

"I do however take offense at your defense of the farm industry, did you know that most of the R&D costs are subsidized by the federal government?"

 

That is nonsense. The federal government does not subsidize pharma's R&D costs. It provides corporate tax relief for the INVESTMENTS that the pharma, biotech, and device industries make as part of their effort to bring new drugs to market. That is not a subsidy. Incidentally, the federal government makes large subsidies to the farmers in this country, despite the fact that corn prices keep rising. I pay $4.99 for a box of cereal that has about 15 cents worth of product value. Are you equally upset when the government subsidizes these industries?

 

 "Did you know that before most drugs go generic.  The company will sue any generic manufacturer to extend the patent anywhere from 3 to 10 years."

 

Sure. That's a logical business decision for a publicly-held company. Why shouldn't they try to extend the life of their product when possible? After all, they created it! They took the risks and made the investments to create the molecule, why shouldn't they try to continue to recoup their investment and profit from it? This takes place in nearly every industry, why is pharma called out special?

 

"A provider/PA/NP/doc working for Pharma is selling your soul."

 

There are many providers working in pharma, biotech, and medical device who are trying to find cures and solutions for your patients. I hope that more clinicians, especially PAs, take up a role in industry. It needs more of a scientific base to help move it away from the marketing circus it was. I would think you would agree with this. You prescribe medications to your patients, ostensibly because you believe they work and are providing them benefit. Why wouldn't you want to see the industry return to it's scientific roots and work to provide better cures for your patients. The best way to get to that point is to get MORE clinicians involved in the business.

 

"pharmaceutical development should not be at the sole discretion of profit, Pharma companies overcharge even the largest insurance companies by approximately 30%, we know this because the VA was successful at reducing drug costs at least 30% when they negotiated a formulary."

 

Again, these are business arguments. If profit is not the motivation for a business to create new product, what is? Who do you want to pay for the research, tax payers? The Federal budget is in such bad shape right now, where are we going to find the money to pay for the research and development of new compounds?

 

" Medicare part D was simply a handout of more profit to drug companies as it did not allow the government to negotiate drug prices."

 

I agree with you on this, but it did provide more of your patients access to medication.

 

"Simply because a drug company comes up with a new drug does not make it an angelic enterprise."

 

I agree with you on this as well. But coming up with a new drug does not make it a demonic enterprise either. Pharma's reputation has plummeted due to their business models of the past, but the industry still has a lot to offer and will hopefully regain the respect it once had.

 

 

"to the original poster, keeping it on track, I for one would not want to work for a pharmacology company, I to have an MBA and extensive business background and the more I learned of the business world the less I liked it.  Maybe times are changing, but I know where I belong."

 

Fair enough. You and I are clearly not on the same page with this issue. I do respect your work as a PA and admire the business you've started up North. I no longer work in pharma, but if I ever do again, I will do my part to help restore the reputation of the industry, and help find good, fairly priced solutions for your patients.

 

Have a good holiday. Tim

[ventana]

 

"I also disagree with you that the sins of Pharma are in the past, they continue today. they are now just further in the closet."

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "further in the closet." The pharma industry has drastically overhauled their marketing practices. The "give-aways" and no-show speaker events are gone. The junkets and high honoraria for "speaker training" has been drastically cut back. All expenditures >$10 are now reported and speakers are required to announce their industry ties prior to any sponsored lecture. I think pharma has come a long way from the past two decades.

 

"also,, has consistently been the top revenue-producing, profiteering, return on investment sector in the entire stock market. "  

 

So what? There business, that's the expectation of the share holders.

 

"This is on the backs of the working people who get prescribed very expensive drugs when a generic would do." 

 

I have no problem with prescribing generic drugs where it's appropriate. I'm sensitive to the fact that some folks are unable to afford branded drugs, but most of the pharma companies have drug discount programs to help out those who qualify. I find it maddening that some of my patients have the audacity to complain about their $4 per day pharma expense, and then leave my ED to purchase their daily $8 per pack cigarettes. It's always more convenient to blame someone else for your problems that face your own.

 

 

"I do not do drug rep lunches, I do not have samples, I do not write namebrand drugs unless there is simply no alternative."

 

That's fine. I don't think having lunches, accepting samples, or writing name brand drugs makes you de facto corrupt provider, though. 

 

"I do however take offense at your defense of the farm industry, did you know that most of the R&D costs are subsidized by the federal government?"

 

That is nonsense. The federal government does not subsidize pharma's R&D costs. It provides corporate tax relief for the INVESTMENTS that the pharma, biotech, and device industries make as part of their effort to bring new drugs to market. That is not a subsidy. Incidentally, the federal government makes large subsidies to the farmers in this country, despite the fact that corn prices keep rising. I pay $4.99 for a box of cereal that has about 15 cents worth of product value. Are you equally upset when the government subsidizes these industries?

 

 "Did you know that before most drugs go generic.  The company will sue any generic manufacturer to extend the patent anywhere from 3 to 10 years."

 

Sure. That's a logical business decision for a publicly-held company. Why shouldn't they try to extend the life of their product when possible? After all, they created it! They took the risks and made the investments to create the molecule, why shouldn't they try to continue to recoup their investment and profit from it? This takes place in nearly every industry, why is pharma called out special?

 

"A provider/PA/NP/doc working for Pharma is selling your soul."

 

There are many providers working in pharma, biotech, and medical device who are trying to find cures and solutions for your patients. I hope that more clinicians, especially PAs, take up a role in industry. It needs more of a scientific base to help move it away from the marketing circus it was. I would think you would agree with this. You prescribe medications to your patients, ostensibly because you believe they work and are providing them benefit. Why wouldn't you want to see the industry return to it's scientific roots and work to provide better cures for your patients. The best way to get to that point is to get MORE clinicians involved in the business.

 

"pharmaceutical development should not be at the sole discretion of profit, Pharma companies overcharge even the largest insurance companies by approximately 30%, we know this because the VA was successful at reducing drug costs at least 30% when they negotiated a formulary."

 

Again, these are business arguments. If profit is not the motivation for a business to create new product, what is? Who do you want to pay for the research, tax payers? The Federal budget is in such bad shape right now, where are we going to find the money to pay for the research and development of new compounds?

 

" Medicare part D was simply a handout of more profit to drug companies as it did not allow the government to negotiate drug prices."

 

I agree with you on this, but it did provide more of your patients access to medication.

 

"Simply because a drug company comes up with a new drug does not make it an angelic enterprise."

 

I agree with you on this as well. But coming up with a new drug does not make it a demonic enterprise either. Pharma's reputation has plummeted due to their business models of the past, but the industry still has a lot to offer and will hopefully regain the respect it once had.

 

 

"to the original poster, keeping it on track, I for one would not want to work for a pharmacology company, I to have an MBA and extensive business background and the more I learned of the business world the less I liked it.  Maybe times are changing, but I know where I belong."

 

Fair enough. You and I are clearly not on the same page with this issue. I do respect your work as a PA and admire the business you've started up North. I no longer work in pharma, but if I ever do again, I will do my part to help restore the reputation of the industry, and help find good, fairly priced solutions for your patients.

 

Have a good holiday. Tim

 

 

 

 

excellent replies

 

I would subject that healthcare is not the sector should be the most profitable, nor should profit be  motivator in it.... hence by disdain to pharma companies.  I will say they have cleaned up their act in the past ten years, but the influence continues and needs to be ended.  Also, I do believe that taking free lunches and gifts does make you much more likely to prescribe their medication. This is marketing to the TOMA strategy and it works.  Why else would they continue to pay their drug reps and keep them working?  Influence is softer now but it absolutely continues

 

 

Overall health insurance should not be a profit sector - it should be to allow the countries citizens to have a basic level of health care.  If we simply took the private insurance companies out of profit making we would save about 25-30% on the gross amount paid for our care. Do we really need to reward stock holders for health care?  We are the only first world country with out some type of formalized health care national policy - we spent the MOST by 50% per capita, and rank somewhere near the bottom of the list for health care quality.  

 

 

I respect your view points, just feel they are not in line with the "good of the society" that we need to be aware of.

 

 

thanks for the discourse and presenting a different view point

[hokie4beach]

Hi- I happened to come across this question bc it’s a very reasonable question or pursuit to combine PA Medicine experience and pharmaceutical experience.  There’s not many of us. I am similar in your situation @schrecky .  I am currently working in emergency medicine for the past 2.5 yrs now as a PA, worked in pharmaceuticals for more than 15 years prior to that.  Currently I enjoy the patient care opportunities and working in ED enough to stay and not switch specialties- (derm(?))Haven’t burned out to that point yet. Definitely a change of pace than the routine pharma job.  One thing I know for sure though is I am not retiring in EM and working these crazy hours.  For this reason I have thought the same as you- whether there are positions out there that combine our roles.  Only thing I have come up with are research type positions in the industry or in sales training.  

[Cideous]

Man these old threads popping up crack me up.  Funny though, the topics are almost always still very relevant.

[AnchorandCaduceus]

I have been working in the pharma/regulatory field as a PA since 2005. I have worked in Drug Safety, Regulatory, Clinical Research, in both domestic and foreign locations. I would like to revive this thread. 

[hokie4beach]

@AnchorandCaduceus

How have you enjoyed working in Drug safety/reg/research? What field did you work in as a PA prior to going into Pharma?

Is pay comparable or more?

ER is aging me....haha. As much as I have thought about returning to my Pharma years prior to becoming a PA... I can't see myself going into a sales role. Would be interesting to hear what you do on a day to day basis!

Edited July 30, 2020 by hokie4beach

[AnchorandCaduceus]

@hokie4beach

I sent you a PM. 
I think pay in the pharma/research field can be comparable to the clinical field. It’s hard to compare though since one you can do overtime while the other you have stock options. I think PAs pay is limited in the clinical side;the more you work the more pay. But we all know this gets old quickly. In the pharma side you can move up, lateral move, work overseas, salary pay, stocks, and have higher ceiling on the pay. I was surprised with the type of clinical work we do and have a comparable office job pay! 
Having that clinical experience though keeps many doors open but having another field under belt opens even more. You can always go back to the ED! Try to make the move as soon as you can before you get burned out. I would look into Drug Safety Associate to get a feel of Pharma. It’s a drastic change of pace. But keep the ED for moonlighting. This way you can keep up with your clinical skills. 

[Mayamom]

Where do you find these jobs?  I searched for years to get out of patient care but was unsucessfull.  

[schrecky]

I wrote this original post almost ten years ago, and I'm glad to see that others are still investigating this path. As I've posted before, the pharmaceutical industry has gone through a significant transformation and "rightsizing" since I left in 2009 and the unbridled marketing/sales tactics are checked. 

I still have friends working pharma and, aside from the typical complaints about corporate life (downsizing, budget issues, etc.), they still seem happy. One area that seems ripe for PAs is the role of "medical science liaison" (MSL). These roles represent products or disease states on behalf of the company, and from a research perspective. There is a firewall between the MSL and sales, although it used to be more porous in the past.

If anyone has worked this role for pharma/biotech, please share your experience vis a vis PA clinical roles. Are the pay and benefits close? Do you have to travel often? How often do you work clinically as well?

Thanks,

Tim