The Difference Between a “KOL” vs. a “KPI”

Let me begin by defining a “KOL” for this purpose.  From our work to date, we have seen that the need for innovation is usually well established in the literature and the demand for improved treatment exists among leading authorities. Therefore, the focus of the N-of-8 advisory board should be on accelerating change in protocols, gaining formulary status, and achieving coverage by payers.

So we can envision using traditional KOLs to promote the science, but then establish a new kind of advisor who can create actionable change in current protocols – a Key Practice Influencer. You’ll see me refer to a “KPI” in a major chapter in my upcoming book, N-of-8.

We are often asked to develop a qualified list of US KOLs for disease management reviews and new product assessment.  Let’s take a look at a possible set of criteria one might to use for KPIs, for example in the intervention of uncontrolled bleeding emergency or surgical settings.

Target:

• Current KPIs and “rising stars” in the field drawn from a number of disciplines –
• Blood bank directors
• Hematologists
• Emergency medicine physicians
• Anesthesiologists
• Surgeons
• Hospital pharmacists

In addition, Influencers with expertise in one or more of the following areas is
essential:

• Bleeding during surgery
• Uncontrolled bleeding
• Congenital fibrinogen deficiency
• Rapid warfarin reversal
• Use of Novo-7 or other PCCs (including Profilnine and Feiba VH)

Outcomes:

• National list of 30 – 50 KPIs
• Representation from each of the disciplines
• Representation across institution spectrum
• Primary and secondary sources of information
• Tactical recommendations to engage potential Influencers
• Creative framework to leverage sponsor’s commitment