P2P Syncro recently completed a physician education program on the treatment of a rare disease with a prevalence of approximately 1 to 80,000. The disease affects children more than adults. Our program had robust participation from pediatricians. However, the practice behavioral change, measured by objective claims data, was mostly observed in learners who practice adult medicine (e.g., internal medicine). If majority of the learners are pediatricians, should the subsequent behavioral change be seen more from them?  Why did we observe the opposite?

We investigated. We realized that, unlike pediatricians, adult medicine providers reached by our program were those who had already diagnosed or managed the disease. For rare diseases, changing treatment behavior, rather than diagnostic behavior, may only be possible when the target audience is already familiar with the condition and has prior experience managing it.

Mismatch between claims data and participation data? We think we find the answer…