Back to Overview
Reinventing Patient Centricity

Patient-Centric Measurement
& Organizational Models

Extracted from Reinventing Patient Centricity — a structured breakdown of how pharma organizations measure patient-centric performance and structure their teams.

Key Insights

Metrics Must Cover All Three Dimensions

Activity alone (budgets, headcount) isn't enough. True patient-centricity requires measuring Experience (NPS, QoL) AND Impact (QALYs, TRx) simultaneously.

Org Model Choice Drives Scale

Brand-Led models maximize tailoring but don't scale. Federated models scale globally but require heavy change management. No single model fits all companies.

Patient Experience Is the Connector

Experience sits at the center of the framework — it bridges internal Activity (what the org does) with external Impact (what patients and society gain).

Business & Societal Impact Are Aligned

Higher adherence (TRx, NBRx) and better QALYs aren't competing goals — they're linked. Patient-centric programs that improve outcomes also improve commercial performance.

Integrated Measurement Framework

Table 11-1: Metrics That Allow Activity → Experience → Impact to Be Connected

Activity→Experience→Impact
Activity

Internal Enablers

  • Budget for patient-centric initiatives
  • Prosocial job characteristics scale
  • Partnerships, clinical trial length
  • Number of non-pharma diversity metrics
Experience

Patient Engagement

  • Web metrics, app usage metrics
  • Program enrollments
Experience

Clinical (Perceptual)

  • Patient-reported outcomes (mood, pain, sleep scores)
  • Net Promoter Score (NPS)
  • Quality of Life (QoL)
  • Patient Activation Measure (PAM)
  • Patient Experience Index (PXI)
Impact

Patient Impact

  • Healthcare resource utilization
  • Healthcare cost, clinical outcomes
  • QALYs
Impact

Business Impact

  • TRx, NBRx, therapy switches
  • Adherence on treatment
  • Trial enrollment, trial retention
Impact

Societal Impact

  • Health equity
  • Overall healthcare costs
  • Population health

Step-by-Step Calculation Examples (Activity → Experience → Impact)

Select any of the 6 framework categories below to view worked mathematical formulas and real-world specialty pharmacy calculations for each metric.

ACTIVITY · Internal Enablers

Patient-Centric Budget Allocation, Prosocial Score & Trial Cycle Reduction

Budget for patient-centric initiativesProsocial job characteristics scalePartnerships, clinical trial lengthNumber of non-pharma diversity metrics

A specialty pharma team allocates $4.2M out of a $35.0M brand operational budget to patient-centric initiatives, surveys 40 staff on the 7-point Prosocial Job Characteristics Scale, and partners with 6 patient advocacy groups to shorten protocol amendment cycle times.

Activity Enabler Formulas

1.Budget Share (%) = (Patient-Centric Budget / Total Brand Budget) × 100
2.Budget Share (%) = ($4.2M / $35.0M) × 100 = 12.0%
3.Prosocial Scale Mean = Σ(Employee Scores) / n = 232 / 40 = 5.80 / 7.00
4.Trial Length Reduction (%) = ((Baseline Months − Partnered Months) / Baseline) × 100 = ((28 − 22.4) / 28) × 100 = 20.0%
5.Site Diversity Representation = Sites Meeting ≥3 Non-Pharma Diversity Criteria / Total Sites = 38 / 50 = 76.0%
Result12.0% Budget · 5.8/7 Prosocial · -20% Trial Length
1

1. Budget for patient-centric initiatives

($4,200,000 / $35,000,000) × 100 = 12.0% of total operational budget
2

2. Prosocial job characteristics scale (1–7 Likert)

X̄ = Σxᵢ / n = 232 / 40 respondents = 5.80 (Target ≥ 5.50)
3

3. Partnerships & clinical trial length impact

Δ Trial Length = 28.0 mo − 22.4 mo = 5.6 mo saved (20.0% faster with 6 advocacy partnerships)
4

4. Number of non-pharma diversity metrics met

38 of 50 trial sites meet ≥ 3 socioeconomic/demographic diversity thresholds = 76.0%

Patient-Centric Organizational Models

Figure 10-3: Four structural archetypes for embedding patient-centricity across pharma organizations.

🏷️

Brand-Led

Structure

Embedded under VP Marketing, TA → Brand team + VP Patient Support → Patient outreach, Digital, Access, Call centers

Key Characteristics

  • Fully embedded under marketing function by brand or TA
  • Only exists within Commercial
  • High number of tailored offerings

Strengths

  • • Ensures both operational and marketing aspects consistently considered
  • • Streamlined communication enables better brand needs delivery

Challenges

  • • No formal process for expertise to be shared across organization
  • • Particularly limited for pipeline/early stage development
🌐

Distributed Universe

Structure

Patient Experience at center surrounded by: IT, Info management, Promotional effectiveness, Market research, Multi-channel excellence, Patient services, Marketing

Key Characteristics

  • Patient-centric responsibilities fully embedded within functions
  • Often aligned by therapeutic areas

Strengths

  • • Ensures both therapeutic and functional aspects are considered
  • • Streamlined communication enables better delivery upon needs

Challenges

  • • No formal leadership to drive patient centric leadership
  • • Priorities and execution to establish global patient-centric operations
🎯

Center of Excellence / Hub

Structure

Patient Capabilities hub connected to: Brand team, Market research, Multi-channel marketing, Analytics, Digital, Patient services

Key Characteristics

  • Hub provides on-demand support across the organization
  • May align to therapeutic areas

Strengths

  • • Easiest to implement — requires limited organizational change
  • • Ensures best practices and expertise are shared
  • • Allows greater sophistication of offerings

Challenges

  • • Lacks mandate/power to drive change across the organization
  • • C-suite support vital for this model to succeed
🔗

Federated

Structure

Centralized capability (People/Support, SOPs/Guidelines, Methods/Tools) → Federated implementation (Clinical ops, Brand team, Patient services, Regulatory)

Key Characteristics

  • Centralized patient-centric governance and capability
  • Functions/teams given some flexibility in how to engage/use

Strengths

  • • Balance between centralized capabilities and governance with function/team implementation
  • • Efficient for scaling global patient-centric operations

Challenges

  • • More complicated operating model — requires significant change management
  • • Requires regional and functional patient-centric leads for collaboration and pull through