In the fall of 2025, we conducted a short survey among 33 U.S.-based pharmacists asking their opinion regarding patient discussion, storage, and product selection of vaccines. Here is a summary of our findings.
1. What clinicians discuss most when talking about vaccines
When a clinician discusses vaccines with patients, most clinicians (52%) use the vaccine’s INDICATION (e.g., Covid, Flu, RSV, Hepatitis B, etc.) followed by the BRAND NAME (42%. Only 2 respondents out of the sample used the ACTIVE INGREDIENT when discussing vaccines with patients.
When a patient discusses vaccines with the pharmacist, the results of this study showed the majority, or 73% used the INDICATION (e.g., Covid, Flu, RSV, Hepatitis B, etc.), and only 18% used the BRAND NAME, and 9% used the ACTIVE INGREDIENT.
How we interpret these results: Although clinicians anchor vaccine conversations around the type of vaccine, with their patients, we cannot overlook the value of a brand name in patient communications as well as between healthcare professionals and the health provider team. As an immunizing pharmacist, when selecting the proper vaccine product to dispense and ultimately administer to a patient, verification of the patient’s name and age, as well as the type of vaccine and the brand name, is often communicated to the patient. In some cases, the name of the manufacturer will also be communicated to the patient.
2. How vaccines are organized in clinical settings
When asked how vaccines are organized in storage areas, the results of the study showed by BRAND NAME (n=11) as the top answer.
The following shows the results in descending order:
- By Brand Name (n=11) and
- By use-case / specific area or shelf (n=10) and By Indication (n=8)
- By Active Ingredient (n=2)
- No organization at all (n=2)
How we interpret these results: Organizations still utilize the BRAND NAME, rather than an active ingredient, also called the generic name, to store vaccines, prioritizing workflow efficiency. However, these results provide support for vaccines organized by use or indication to help minimize confusion in product selection.
3. Perceived areas of confusion with vaccine products
The results indicate that several potential points of confusion exist in practice regarding vaccine products. Specifically, the results showed the following:
Confusion between different vaccine indications (42%)
- Confusion between vaccine products within the same disease area (24%)
- Confusion between an entire vaccine product category and another (6%)
- None of the above (27%)
How we interpret these results: According to this small study, the highest potential for confusion in practice lies in distinguishing between different vaccine products based on their indication or usage. The organization of vaccines by brand name, rather than indication in the same storage area (e.g., refrigerator) may help to minimize the potential for confusion. Although, this is a very small study, the results provide support for the opportunity to help prevent medication errors by the use of a distinct and appropriate brand name for a vaccine product to help with product selection and minimize confusion in practice.
This study is part of an initiative for providing industry recommendations for naming vaccine products. If you have comments or questions, please reach out directly to dyan@brandsymbol.com.