Summer Internship Project Report On Understanding consumers requirements towards a non-smelling pain relieving gel By Ishita Arora A0101911182

MBA (G) Class of 2013 Under the Supervision of Dr. Anita Kumar Assistant Professor Marketing department In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Business Administration at AMITY BUSINESS SCHOOL AMITY UNIVERSITY UTTAR PRADESH SECTOR 125, NOIDA - 201303, UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA 2012

DECLARATION

Title of Project Report: To understand the consumers requirements towards a non-smelling or fragrance based pain relieving gel

I declare

(a) That the work presented for assessment in this Summer Internship Report is my own, that it has not previously been presented for another assessment and that my debts (for words, data, arguments and ideas) have been appropriately acknowledged.

(b) That the work conforms to the guidelines for presentation and style set out in the relevant documentation.

Date :

Ishita Arora A0101911182 MBA Class of 2013

ii

CERTIFICATE

I , D r . Anita Kumar, hereby certify that Ishita Arora student of Masters of Business Administration (G) at Amity Business School, Amity University Uttar Pradesh has completed the Project Report on Understanding consumers requirements towards a non-smelling or fragrance based pain relieving gel, under my guidance.

Dr. Anita Kumar Assistant Professor Department of Marketing

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, I would like to thank my faculty guide, Ms. Anita Kumar, and my industrial guide, Ms. Monika Badoni (Category Manager), and Ms. Aditi Tandon (Brand Manager, Volini), for allowing me to undergo internship under their guidance and supervision. It gave me an opportunity to participate and learn a deal about the various financial investments options like currencies, commodity, equity, mutual funds, SIP, ETF etc.

I would also like to show my sincere appreciation to Ms. Monika Badoni (Category Manager), who inspired me greatly to work on this project. Her willingness to motivate me contributed tremendously to the project. I would also like to thank him for guiding me with some examples that related to the topic of the project, for suggesting alternative solutions & sharing their valuable experience & knowledge with me, and also for facilitating me in gaining practical knowledge.

This project has been made possible through the direct and indirect cooperation of various staff members of Ranbaxy Labs Ltd. and without whose cooperation & help the completion of this internship was not possible.

Besides, I would like to thank the authority of Ranbaxy Labs Ltd. for providing me with a good environment and facilities to complete this project.

Finally, an honorable mention goes to my family and friends for their understandings and supports on me in completing this project. Without helps of the particular that mentioned above, we would face many difficulties while doing this project.

iv

Ishita Arora TO STUDY THE CONSUMERS, PERCEPTION TOWARDS A NON-SMELLING PAIN RELIEVING GEL

ABSTRACT
The objective of the project was to carry out product test among current Volini gel users and Moov users of a non smelling Volini formulation and collect feedback on various efficacy parameters. For this, I have to understand the customer needs and requirements with respect to the pain relieving gel.As the gel was new and it was yet to be marketed to a large number of customers, it was essential to know the likes and dislikes of the consumers w.r.t their preferred brands and their expectations from an ideal pain reliever. So that, appropriate marketing strategies and changes can be applied to the new gel to make it consumer friendly.The continuous visits to households made it possible for me to measure the satisfaction of consumers with respect to the attributes, such as efficacy, quickness of relief, sensation and most importantly, the smell.The study was done in Delhi region for two months. The method undertaken for the research was Marketing Research (Both primary research & secondary research), and Questionnaire method.The questionnaire was divided into two parts. One for the normal pain relieving gels/ointments/creams/balms/oils etc. and the other for the Fenak gel.It had questions related to the acceptability of the pain relieving gel wrt a. Color b. Smell c. Ease of absorption d. Pain relieving ability/ efficacy e. Quickness of relief f. Sensation Once the readings were taken, the questionnaire was analysed and conclusions were made regarding both Volini and Moov users and how they felt about the fenak gel.

Table of Contents

S.No. 1 Introduction

Particulars

Page No. 1 1 4 7 7 9 12 12

1.1 Indian Pharmaceutical Industry Overview 1.1.1 Ranbaxy Global Consumer Healthcare 1.2 Purpose of the Study 1.3 Significance of the Study 1.4 Theoretical Framework 2 Review of the Literature 2.1 Cross-category innovativeness as a source of new product ideas 2.2 Aromatherapy in the management of acute pain 2.3 Cognitive modulation of pain 2.4 The basis of odor effects on pain 2.5 Changing Odor Hedonic Perception Through Emotional Associations in Humans 2.6 Human brain mechanisms of pain perception and regulation in health and disease 2.7 Pain-related emotions modulate experimental pain perception and autonomic responses 2.8 Transcending the dualisms: towards a sociology of pain 3 Research Methods and Procedures 3.1 Purpose of the Study 3.2 Research Design 3.3 Participants 3.4 Research Hypothesis 3.5 Instrument Used 3.6 Pilot Study 3.7 Data Analysis 3.8 Limitations

12 13 15 16

17

17

18 20 20 20 20 22 22 23 23 23

vi

4 Data Analysis and Findings 4.1 Age of the respondent 4.2 Gender of the respondent 4.3 SEC category 4.4 Type of pain the respondent suffers from 4.5 Frequency of the pain 4.6 what does respondent applies to overcome the pain 4.7 brand the respondent most often uses 4.8 Ranking given by the respondent towards various attributes with respect to an ideal pain relieving gel/ cream 4.9 Reasons why respondents felt smell is important/ not important in case of their ideal pain reliever

24 24 24 25 25 26 26 27 27

33

4.10 Respondents feeling if a non smelling product would be okay 34 or not? 4.11 Rating given for the overall brand (used brand) the respondent currently uses 4.12 Strength of the smell 4.13 Rating given for various attributes w.r.t the Fenak gel given to the respondents 4.14 Feedback of the respondents on the smell of fenak gel 4.15 Rank given by the respondent to Fenak Gel 5 Conclusions and Recommendations 5.1 Conclusion 5.2 Recommendations 6 References 7 Appendix 43 44 59 59 59 60 61 39 40 38

vii

List of figures

Figure Number 4.01 4.02 4.03 4.04 4.05 4.06 4.07 4.08 4.09 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.15 4.16 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.20 4.21 4.22 4.23 4.24 4.25 4.26 4.27 4.28 Age of the Respondent

Figure Name

Page Number 24 24 25 26 27 27 28 29 30 31 32 34 34 35 36 36 37 38 38 39 40 41 41 42 42 43 44 44

Gender of the Respondent SEC category Frequency of pain Brand the respondent uses Rank for an ideal pain reliever Rank for an ideal pain relievers smell Rank for an ideal pain relievers ease of absorption Rank for ideal pain relievers efficacy Rank for ideal pain relievers quickness of relief Rank for an ideal pain relievers sensation If a non smelling product is ok? Color of the respondents pain reliever Smell if the respondents pain reliever Rating for ease of absorption Rating for efficacy of the used brand Rating for quickness of relief of the used brand Rating for the sensation of the used brand Rating for the overall brand Strength of the smell Rating for the color of fenak Rating for the smell of Fenak Rating for ease of absorption of Fenak Rating for efficacy of Fenak Rating for quickness of relief of Fenak Rating for sensation of Fenak Rank given for Fenak Respondents who would like to purchase it
viii

List o f Tables
Table Number 4.01 4.02 4.03 4.04 Significance of smell Crosstab of gender and age group of respondents crosstab of age and pain the respondent suffers from crosstab between gender and the pain the respondent suffers from 4.04 4.05 4.06 4.07 4.08 4.09 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.15 crosstab between brand used and color cosstab between brand used and smell crosstab between brand used and ease of absorption crosstab between brand used and efficacy crosstab between brand used and quickness of relief crosstab between brand used and sensation crosstab between brands and color crosstab between brands and Smell crosstab between brands and Ease of absorption crosstab between the brands and Efficacy crosstab between brands and Quickness of Relief crosstab between brands and sensation of their respective brands 4.16 4.17 4.18 4.19 summary of the top scores obtained for fenak gel summary of the bottom scores w.r.t. Fenak gel mean scores of attributes w.r.t the Fenak gel crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the color of fenak 4.20 crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the smell of Fenak 4.21 crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the Ease of Absorption of Fenak 56 55 52 53 54 55 47 47 48 48 49 49 50 50 50 51 51 51 Table Name Page Number 33 45 45 46

ix

4.22

crosstab of brand used and their opinion on the Efficacy of Fenak

56

4.23

crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the quickness of relief of fenak

56

4.24

crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the sensation of fenak

57

4.25

crosstab of brand used and if the respondents would like to purchase Fenak or not

57

4.26 4.27

reasons to purchase Fenak Reasons not to purchase fenak

58 58

C H A PT E R 1 : I NT RO D U CT I O N
1.1 Indian Pharmaceutical Industry Overview The Pharmaceutical industry in India is the world's third-largest in terms of volume and stands 14th in terms of value. According to Department of Pharmaceuticals, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers, the total turnover of India's pharmaceuticals industry between 2008 and September 2009 was US$21.04 billion. Sale of all types of medicines in the country is expected to reach around US$19.22 billion by 2012. Exports of pharmaceuticals products from India increased from US$6.23 billion in 2006-07 to US$8.7 billion in 2008-09 a combined annual growth rate of 21.25%. According to PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) in 2010, India joined among the league of top 10 global pharmaceuticals markets in terms of sales by 2020 with value reaching US$50 billion. Some of the major pharmaceutical firms include Sun Pharmaceutical, Cadila Healthcare and Piramal Healthcare.. The lack of patent protection made the Indian market undesirable to the multinational companies that had dominated the market, and while they streamed out. Indian companies carved a niche in both the Indian and world markets with their expertise in reverse-engineering new processes for manufacturing drugs at low costs. Although some of the larger companies have taken baby steps towards drug innovation, the industry as a whole has been following this business model until the present. Pharmaceutical industry today The number of purely Indian pharma companies is fairly low. Indian pharma industry is mainly operated as well as controlled by dominant foreign companies having subsidiaries in India due to availability of cheap labour in India at lowest cost. In 2002, over 20,000 registered drug manufacturers in India sold $9 billion worth of formulations and bulk drugs. 85% of these formulations were sold in India while over 60% of the bulk drugs were exported, mostly to the United States and Russia. Most of the players in the market are small-to-medium enterprises; 250 of the largest

companies control 70% of the Indian market. Thanks to the 1970 Patent Act, multinationals represent only 35% of the market, down from 70% thirty years ago. Most pharma companies operating in India, even the multinationals, employ Indians almost exclusively from the lowest ranks to high level management. Mirroring the social structure, firms are very hierarchical. Homegrown pharmaceuticals, like many other businesses in India, are often a mix of public and private enterprise. Although many of these companies are publicly owned, leadership passes from father to son and the founding family holds a majority share. In terms of the global market, India currently holds a modest 1-2% share, but it has been growing at approximately 10% per year. India gained its foothold on the global scene with its innovatively engineered generic drugs and active pharmaceutical ingredients (API), and it is now seeking to become a major player in outsourced clinical research as well as contract manufacturing and research. There are 74 U.S. FDA-approved manufacturing facilities in India, more than in any other country outside the U.S, and in 2005, almost 20% of all Abbreviated New Drug Applications (ANDA) to the FDA are expected to be filed by Indian companies. The Indian pharmaceutical industry has become the third largest producer in the world and is poised to grow into an industry of $ 20 billion in 2015 from the current turnover of $ 12 billion. Introduction to Ranbaxy Labs Ltd Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited is an integrated, research based, international pharmaceutical company, producing a wide range of quality, affordable generic medicines. Ranbaxy is ranked amongst the top ten global generic companies and has a presence in 23 of the top 25 pharma markets of the world. The company is headquartered in India. It has presence in 49 countries, with manufacturing facilities in 11 and a diverse product portfolio. History Ranbaxy was incorporated in 1961. Bhai Mohan Singh was the founder of the company. He bought the company from his cousins Ranjit Singh and Gurbax Singh. Ranbaxy's name is a fusion of Ranjit and Gurbax's names. Ranbaxy went public in 1973. Ranbaxy's first joint venture was set up in Lagos (Nigeria) in 1977. In 1985,
2

Ranbaxy Research Foundation was established and Stancare, Ranbaxy's second pharmaceutical market division started functioning. In 1987, production started at Ranbaxy's Toansa Plant (Punjab) and with this Ranbaxy became India's largest manufacturer of antibiotics/antibacterials. In 1988, Ranbaxy's Toansa Plant got US FDA approval. In 1990, Ranbaxy was granted its first US patent, for Doxycyline. In 1993, Ranbaxy set up a joint venture in China. In 1994, Ranbaxy established regional headquarters in UK and USA. In the same year its GDR was listed in Luxembourgh Stock Exchange. In 1995, Ranbaxy acquired Ohm Laboratories, a manufacturing facility in the US and inaugurated state-of-the art new manufacturing wing at Ranbaxy's US subsidiary Ohm Laboratories Inc. In 1997, Ranbaxy crossed a sales turnover of Rs. 10,000 million. In 1998, Ranbaxy entered USA, world's largest pharmaceutical market, with products under its own name. In the same year, Ranbaxy filed its first Investigational New Drug (IND) application with the Drugs Controller General OF India for approvals to conduct Phase 1 Clinical trials. In 1999, Ranbaxy commenced trials for its NCE. In 2000, Ranbaxy acquired Bayer's Generic business in Germany, and entered into Brazil, the largest pharmaceutical market in South America. In 2001, Ranbaxy set up a manufacturing facility in Vietnam. In 2003, Ranbaxy launched Cefuroxime Axetil after approval from USFDA. It was the first approval granted to any generic company for this product. In 2003, Ranbaxy and Glaxo SmithKline Plc entered into an alliance for drug discovery and development. In 2004, Ranbaxy acquired a wholly-owned subsidiary RPG (Aventis) SA and began operations in France as a Top 10 generic company. In 2005, Ranbaxy launched operations in Canada and acquired generic product portfolio from EFARMES of Spain. In 2006, Ranbaxy acquired Be Tabs pharmaceuticals of South Africa, unbranded generic business of GSK in Italy & Spain, and Terapia of Romania. Major Achievements of Ranbaxy 1) India's largest pharmaceutical company. 2) Received The Economic Times Award for Corporate Excellence for 'The Company of the Year 2002-2003'. 3) Ranbaxy is among the elite club of Million Dollar Companies.

4) Ranbaxy received India's first approval from USFDA for an Anti Retroviral (ARV) drug under the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.

Mission Ranbaxy's mission is 'Enriching lives globally, with quality and affordable pharmaceuticals'.

1.1.1 Ranbaxy Global Consumer Healthcare

An introduction to Ranbaxy Global Consumer Healthcare Moving up the value chain, Ranbaxy identified Consumer Healthcare as its new business area in the year 2001. Subsequently, Ranbaxy Global Consumer Healthcare (RGCH) business was initiated with the launch of 4 brands: Revital, Pepfiz, Gesdyp & Garlic Pearls. These brands had a strong equity with consumers and represented the leading common ailment categories like VMS (Vitamins & Minerals Supplement), this portfolio was carefully crafted for the introduction of Ranbaxy's consumer healthcare business in India. Subsequently in 2004, RGCH launched its first herbal range of products through New Age Herbals (NAH), with products offering remedies in categories of Cough & Cold (Olesan Oil & Cough Syrups) and Appetite Stimulant (Eat Ease). In 2005, another popular brand, Chericof The complete cough formula was introduced.During 2009, the business registered sales of US $ 44 Mn registering a growth of 12%.Revital, the flagship brand continues to maintain leadership in its segment.

Ranbaxy Volini

Figure 1.2- Ranbaxy Volini

Ranbaxy Volini is the No. 1 prescribed pain reliever in topical analgesics. It has a quick absorb formula. It is mainly used for the treatment of pain in lower back, back and joints. It gives a cooling sensation so that there is no feeling of burning after applying it. It has 1. Diclofenac Diethylamine, which relieves pain and inflammation 2. Linseed oil, which has a counter-irritant action 3. Menthol, which enhances absorption and provides a cooling action.

A 15 g pack of volini has a market price of Rs. 35 and 28g pack has a price of Rs. 62. Volini spray, on the other hand, has a market price of Rs 65(35g bottle) and Rs 100 (55g bottle) In 2007, volini was added to the list of OTC products and removed from the prescribed drugs. Yet, it is the Doctors No. 1 preferred brand. Volini has the best trial: adoption ratio too. It contributes the most to brand sales. The major Volini users are the females belonging to the age group of 25-45 years, SEC A,B and C.
5

Key Competition: Its key competition is with the following four brands, namely, 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Moov Iodex Amrutanjan Himani Zandu

Uses of Volini Volini is majorly applied for the following purposes, 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) Lower back, back and joint pains Tennis elbow Rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis Thumb, knee and shoulder stiffness Soft tissue disorders Sprains and strains Injury Cervical spondolysis.

The Volini gel is composed of: Diclophenac Diethylamine BP:- 1.16% Linseed oil Methyl Salicylate Menthol :::3% 10% 5%

The preservatives are:Benzyl alcohol Gel base ::1% w/w q.s.

It is manufactured by Solrex Pharmaceuticals

Fenak gel The fenak gel is a pure Diclophenac containing gel. It is assumed to be a non smelling Volini gel, as it is said to be having the same color, efficacy, sensation, texture as that of Volini, except that it is non-smelling.
6

1.2Purpose of the Study The main objectives and the purpose of the research paper are stated in this chapter. The main objectives are as mentioned below: To study the consumer perception on pain relieving gels. To study the consumer requirements towards an analgesic. To find out if the concept of a non smelling gel would be acceptable with the consumers. To conduct market research on various Volini and Moov users. To Analyze and present recommendations

1.3Significance of the Study When someone has muscle or arthritis pain, it can affect every aspect of their life. They limit their activities, cancel plans, and even feel like theyre in a bad mood when these pains strike. When trying to find relief from the pain most people think of reaching for some sort of pill aspirin or paracetamol. Less often, we think of a pain relieving gel to apply to their skin. Gels or other topically remedies have an advantage over pills. Pills or other oral (by mouth) medications enter the bloodstream via the digestive system; therefore everywhere the blood goes in the body, those areas will also receive the effects of the medication, whether or not it is needed. For systemic problems like a cold, flu or fever, oral medication is the clear choice. For more local problems, such as sore muscles from overexertion, or a local flare up of arthritis in the hands, may be best addressed with a topical solution such as a pain relieving gel. Attributes in a Pain Relieving Gel:

There are many formulations on the market today. Some so-called natural remedies contain a few herbal ingredients along with a number other ingredients, such chemicals for thickening, fragrances, preservatives, alcohol and a lot of water. Some are more effective than others. Here are a few guidelines to consider when choosing the right product for the pain relief: 1) What are the ingredients? 2) Will the ingredients give me the effect Im seeking? 3) Are the ingredients all natural or herbal? 4) What are the effects and side effects of the ingredients? 5) Are there ingredients Im allergic to? 6) Is the formulation pure? 7) Is it manufactured up to pharmaceutical standards? 8) Is the formulation concentrated or am I buying water? Most of the pain relieving gels available over the counter for arthritis and muscle pain, contain ingredients that bring on warm, then cool sensations. Some are more effective than others. Many of these products are available only through a professional such as a massage therapist or chiropractor. Common Ingredients in Pain Relieving Gels: There are three main categories of effect these ingredients will have 1) analgesic (pain-killing), 2) anti-inflammatory, 3) Irritating (which, counter-intuitively, is not undesirable in a pain-medicine). Some ingredients can trigger allergic reactions or unwanted side effects. Some ingredients may have more than one of these effects 1) aspirin, for instance, is both analgesic and anti-inflammatory. 2) Irritating ingredients are those such as menthol and camphor, which cause a mild, not-unpleasant stinging sensation that some people feel as heat and others feel as a chill.

This causes a pain-relieving effect because the nerves are distracted in sending the brain the heat/chilling message, and thus cant carry the sore-muscle message at the same time. The following are the common ingredients on the labels of pain medications: 1) Salicylate this is the active ingredient of aspirin. If a patient is avoiding aspirin for any reason, he/she should avoid topical preparations containing salicylate. Otherwise, it is very effective applied right to the source of the pain, and also serves to reduce inflammation that may be the cause of much of the pain. (Volini has Salicylate) 2) Menthol, camphor, clove oil these are all irritating agents that feel either warm or icy on the skin. Most people find the sensation soothing, not irritating. They are very effective for easing pain temporarily. Many topical gels and patches contain one or several of these ingredients, most commonly menthol. E.g. Volini gel. 3) Capsaicin a special case in the irritating agents category, capsaicin is the substance that makes cayenne peppers taste hot, and which can burn your skin. Used in a salve, it functions in the same way as menthol and the other irritants; it has been used in herbal preparations for literally centuries. Modern research has discovered that it also has the property that if used over a period of time, it decreases the nerves store of Substance P, which transmits pain messages to the brain, resulting in a reduction in the ability to feel pain. Since it can take two weeks of application for this effect to be noticed, it is more useful for managing chronic pain such as that associated with arthritis.

1.4 Theoretical Framework The basis for this research was to know if the smell has any effect on the consumer behavior towards a pain relieving gel.
9

The sensory perceptions towards the smell are broadly varied. These perceptions can be classified as the following:1. Smell Whenever a pain relieving gel is applied, a peculiar smell comes out of it. Thus, it may become psychological for most of the people that if the smell comes, it means the pain reliever is having an effect. This is called as a learned effect or associative learning. Thus, due to this associative learning, patients feel that the pain reliever has an action on their body, when applied. And thus, they feel that the pain has reduced. On the other hand,if an associative learning does not exist, there may exist an innate learning. Innate learning is any behavior, that is instinctive, if it is performed without being based upon prior experience (that is, in the absence of learning), and is therefore an expression of innate biological factors. This innate learning is found to be less prevalent in the pain relieving gels, though, if present, it may be classified further as a. b. the respondent likes it the respondent does not like it.

If the respondent likes it, then the same smell would help the respondent feel that the pain has reduced. And if the respondent does,nt like it, it may lead to a negative effect and patient may feel that the pain has elevated.

2.

Attention

A theory says that if the patients are distracted, it would help them to feel that the pain has reduced. The distraction may be caused by adding a burning sensation to it, giving it a particular smell etc, such that, the patient starts to think about the other effect than the pain.

On the other hand, if any kind of distraction is not provided, the respondent may not feel any effect of the pain relieving gel and hence they feel that there is no effect of the gel on pain.

10

3.

Sensation

Respondents feel that a burning sensation has the ability to reduce the pain. This is purely psychological, but the respondents do buy their product on this basis. However, there are a set of people who do not like the burning/ cooling sensation at all and hence it makes them feel that the pain has increased., which is again psychological.

Thus we can say that the smell, sensation, color, apart from efficacy and quickness of relief has an effect on the consumers perception towards a pain relieving gel.

11

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

2.1 J. Bouge (2009) Cross-category innovativeness as a source of new product ideas: Consumers perceptions of over-the-counter pharmacological beverages The borders between food and beverage, pharmaceutical and consumer healthcare industries have become increasingly blurred concurrent to the development of radically innovative health-enhancing foods and beverages within the health and wellness market. This research investigated consumers attitudes and perceptions towards cross-category innovations, and applied it to the design and strategic marketing of novel over-the-counter (OTC) pharmacological beverages. Fifty-eight consumers participated in 10 in-depth interviews and six focus groups. Following this, 286 respondents evaluated hypothetical OTC pharmacological beverage concepts through conjoint analysis. The research revealed that the functional benefit attribute accounted for over 33% of consumers purchase intent for OTC pharmacological beverages, with age and OTC-related purchase behaviours strongly related to cluster membership. Consequently, as companies move towards the extremes of the diethealth continuum, branding, product efficacy and product positioning strategy issues become extremely critical considerations for companies seeking new product opportunities with medicinal-oriented products such as OTC pharmacological beverages. 2.2 M. Ching (1999) Aromatherapy in the Management of Acute Pain? Recent surveys indicate that people are increasingly using complementary therapies as an adjunct or alternative to conventional treatment options as well as for general health and well being. Whilst complementary therapies such as aromatherapy have been utilised in clinical settings as diverse as long term care facilities and palliative care, its application to the acute care setting has not been explored in depth. The changes in contemporary health care practices such as post-operative pain management and length of hospital admissions have provided nurses with the challenge of examining the range of therapeutic interventions that can be applied to their practice. The purpose of this paper is to examine critically the potential uses of aromatherapy in the management of acute post-operative pain. The concept of
12

aromatherapy will be explored in relation to its effects on the pain pathways, methods of administration and therapeutic effects. Specific reference will be made to Lavender (Lavandula angustifolia) and its use in aromatherapy. A review of the literature points to gaps in the knowledge related to the clinical application of aromatherapy in relation to issues of dosage, methods of administration and therapeutic effects. The relatively small number of studies that have looked at aromatherapy in the acute care setting supports the literature reviewed. Issues such as small sample sizes and the difficulty in replicating these studies make it difficult to generalize the findings. In order to achieve best practice, further research is necessary to explore the use of aromatherapy in the management of acute post-operative pain. 2.3 Chantal Villemure, M. Catherine Bushnell*, (2010) Cognitive modulation

of pain: How do attention and emotion inuence pain processing? The Indian Pharmaceutical Industry focuses on pharmacological control of pain. So, majority research on pain control focuses on peripheral and spinal cord mechanisms of opioid and anti-inflammatory analgesic therapy. Recently, variables such as attentional state, emotional context, hypnotic suggestions, attitudes, expectations or anesthesia-induced changes in consciousness now have been shown to alter both pain perception and forebrain pain transmission in humans. These techniques, at times, preferentially alter sensory and/or affective aspects of pain perception, and the associated modulation of pain-evoked neural activity occurs in limbic and/or sensory brain regions, suggesting multiple endogenous painmodulatory systems. This paper compares the modulatory inuences of two principal cognitive variables, attention and emotion, on pain perception and addresses possible neural mechanisms underlying each of these inuences.

Attentional modulation of pain It is the most studied psychological variable that modifies pain. A lot of reports show that lteration of pain is maximum when the patients are distracted. This distraction is caused by achieving another sensory stimuli such as tactile, visual or auditory stimulus. Reports say focusing on pain enhances the pain perception. Males, on the other hand, feel opposite. If they are exposed more to the physical sensations, they feel less pain.
13

Modulation of pain by emotional factors Studies show that manipulations that have a positive effect on mood or emotional state, such as pleasant music, pleasant pictures, and humorous lms, generally reduce pain perception Conversely, experimental manipulations that have a negative effect on mood and emotions have been shown to increase pain, although these effects are less reliable than those related to positive mood manipulations.

Modulation of pain by olfactory stimuli A preliminary report by Marchand et al. (1999) suggests that, in humans, odors inuence both mood and pain in female subjects. Nevertheless, in both the animal and human studies of the effect of olfactory stimuli on pain perception, the inuence of mood and attention has not been dissociated. Since most olfactory stimuli have clear positive or negative hedonic value and can also serve as a target for varying degrees of directed attention, the olfactory modality provides a useful tool for studying the interaction between direction of attention and emotional context on pain perception. A study in the laboratory (Villemure et al., unpublished data) controlled and manipulated independently direction of attention and hedonic value of an odor distracter. It was found out that attention and odor valence independently altered pain perception. Further, whereas attentional manipulations had no effect on mood but altered the perception of both pain intensity and unpleasantness, odor valence altered both mood and pain unpleasantness but did not signicantly affect pain sensation.

Modulation of pain by other external stimuli When subjects mood was improved by reading elative statements, pain tolerance (a measure of the affective dimension of pain) was increased, whereas when their mood was made worse by reading depressive statements.

14

2.4

John Prescott (2006) The Basis Of Odor Effects On Pain: A Review And

Investigation Of Conditioned Odor Effects

There is increasing evidence that odors may influence human responses to pain. Such findings have been attributed variously either to odors directing attention away from the pain or to the fact that odors may influence moods, which in turn may modify the unpleasantness or intensity of pain. Neither of these explanations invoke mechanisms that are specific to odors, however, since other sensory stimuli may produce similar effects. Since odors may take on properties through repeated association with tastes, for example, in foods, it is possible that reductions of pain or pain unpleasantness during odor exposure might result from these secondary characteristics. In particular, many odors are reported as smelling sweet, a consequence of their prior association with sweet tastes. The underlying mechanism of sweet taste palatability, and indeed the ability of tasted sweetness to act as an analgesic, is activation of opioid reward systems in the brain. One possibility therefore is that sweet smelling odors may have been conditioned to activate these same opioid systems, which may result in odors themselves acting to produce inhibitory effects on pain. This hypothesis was tested by comparing the ability of odors varying along the dimensions of sweetness and pleasantness to influence pain induced by immersion of the forearm in cold water. An odor that was sweet smelling produced a significant increase in the time in which subjects kept their arm in the water. A pleasant, but not sweet-smelling odor had no similar impact. These data strongly suggest that as predicted sweet-smelling odors may activate opioid systems as a result of associative conditioning. The activation of these reward pathways may explain why sweetsmelling odors such as vanilla may be (as far as we are aware) universally liked, and also may act to increase liking for odor mixtures in which they are included. Odors could be influential through:

Innate effects, in which the odor molecules directly interact in some fundamental and quite specific way with physiological processes. If potential pheremonal effects and the impact of many odorous compounds on trigeminal fibres, and hence on pain

15

systems, is ruled out, it is safe to say that there is little or no evidence for such mechanisms.

Learned responses, in which an odor becomes associated with some event, process or object that influences the responses to, or perceptions of, that odor. Here, we might want to further distinguish

i. Effects based on familiarity or pleasantness, both of which are based on exposure and in some cases pairing with other liked stimuli; ii. Effects based on odor being used, a conditioned (learned) signal for a specific behavioural or physiological response.

2.5

RS Herz (2004) Changing Odor Hedonic Perception Through Emotional

Associations in Humans A long-standing debate in theories of olfactory perception is whether hedonic responses to odors are innate or learned. Hedonic perception refers to affective evaluations that center on liking. Traditionally in odor research, the perceptual factors of pleasantness, familiarity, and intensity have been used to evaluate hedonic perception (Moskowitz et al., 1976; Sulmont et al., 2002).

The innate view of hedonic perception claims that we are born with a predisposition to like or dislike various smells. Though widely held, this view has not been empirically validated in humans and is largely due to extrapolations from animal pheromonal communication (Rasmussen & Schulte, 1998). In contrast, the learned view states that we are born merely with a predisposition to learn to like or dislike smells, and that whether a smell is liked or not is due to the emotional valence of the experiences that have been associated to it (Bartoshuk, 1991; Engen, 1991;Herz, 2001).

Associative learning, the process by which one event or item comes to be linked to another because of an individuals past experiences, is responsible for a large part of human cognition and behavior (Wasserman & Miller, 1997). It is proposed that odor hedonic responses are formed from a learned association combining the sensory percept and the emotional experience when the percept was
16

first encountered (Bartoshuk, 1991; Engen, 1991; Herz, 2001). For example, a novel odor is experienced in conjunction with an emotional event that induces anxiety, such as a surgical procedure in a hospital. The odor through its association with the emotion of anxiety then acquires the emotional significance of anxiety, which imbues the odor with hedonic meaning, thus influencing perception (e.g., unpleasant). Thus the reason why we like or dislike various smells is due to the associative history of the odors in question. It is not always necessary to have direct contact with an odor in an emotional context in order to learn its significance because cultural learning provides meaning to many unencountered stimuli. That is, one does not need to have been trapped in a burning house to know that the smell of smoke signals danger; learning that where there is smoke there is fire can be sufficient.

2.6

By A. Vania Apkarian, M. Catherine Bushnell, Rolf-Detlef Treede, Jon-Kar

Zubieta,(2005) Human brain mechanisms of pain perception and regulation in health and disease The perception of pain due to an acute injury or in clinical pain states undergoes substantial processing at supraspinal levels. Supraspinal, brain mechanisms are increasingly recognized as playing a major role in the representation and modulation of pain experience. These neural mechanisms may then contribute to interindividual variations and disabilities associated with chronic pain conditions. 2.7 P. Rainville (2005) Pain-related emotions modulate experimental pain perception and autonomic responses The effect of emotions on pain perception is generally recognized but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Pain increases were associated with increases in selfrated desire for relief and decreases in expectation of relief, and with increases in arousal, negative affective valence and decreases in perceived control. Correlation and multiple regression analyses suggest that negative emotions and desire for relief inuence primarily pain affect and that pain-evoked autonomic responses are strongly associated with pain affect. These results conrm the hypothesized inuence of the desire for relief on pain perception, and particularly on pain affect, and support the functional relation between pain affect and autonomic nociceptive responses. This study provides further experimental conrmation that
17

pain-related emotions inuence pain perception and painrelated physiological responses. There is a general agreement that emotions inuence pain. However, there is only moderate consensus about the specic conditions under which those effects occur, their direction and magnitude, or their underlying mechanisms. Both the desire for, and the expectation of, relief and the valence and arousal dimensions of emotions adequately accounted for the changes in pain. However, although pain relief may adequately reect the goal of patients in some acute pain situations, the patients goals may be extremely diverse in chronic pain situations. Assessing more explicitly those goals and the corresponding desire and expectation may inform about the individual underpinnings of painrelated emotions and their possible inuence on pain and suffering.

2.8 Gillian A. Bendelow1, Simon J. Williams (2005) Transcending the dualisms: towards a sociology of pain Theories of pain have traditionally been dominated by biomedicine and concentrate upon its neurophysiological aspects, both in diagnosis and treatment. Hence, scientific medicine reduces the experience of pain to an elaborate broadcasting system of signals, rather than seeing it as moulded and shaped both by the individual and their particular socio-cultural context. Although pain lies at the intersection between biology and culture, making it an obvious topic for sociological investigation, scant attention has been paid to understanding beliefs about pain within the study of health and illness. A major impediment to a more adequate conceptualisation of pain is due to the manner in which it has been medicalised, resulting in the inevitable Cartesian split between body and mind. Consequently, the dominant conceptualisation of pain has focused upon sensation, with the subsequent inference that it is able to be rationally and objectively measured. Yet as well as being a medical problem, pain is an everyday experience. Moreover, sociological and phenomenological approaches to pain would add to, and enhance, existing bodies of knowledge and help to reclaim pain from the dominant scientific paradigm. In this paper, it is argued, firstly, that the elevation of sensation over emotion within medico-psychological approaches to pain, can be shown to be limiting and reductionist. Secondly, we attempt to show how insights from the newly-emerging sociological arenas of emotions and

18

embodiment provide a framework which is able to both transcend the divide between mind and body and to develop a phenomenological approach to pain.

19

CHAPTER-3: RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES

3.1 Purpose of the Study 1) To study the consumers likes and dislikes towards their preferred pain relieving gel (Volini/Moov) 2) To study consumers perceptions towards an ideal pain relieving gel. 3) To study consumers requirements, likes and dislikes with respect to the non smelling pain relieving gel. (non smelling Volini formulation- Fenak) 4) To analyze the results so obtained and provide recommendations such that it helps the company to decide if to launch the product or not. 3.2 Research Design The project uses both exploratory and descriptive research. The research method was the questionnaire method. An intensive secondary research is also conducted to gain insights in the pharmaceutical OTC market. This helps in understanding the various factors affecting the OTC market and the pain relieving gels 3.3 1) Participants

Majority women belonging to the age group of 25-45 years.

Data collection technique and procedure The area for data collection was Delhi region. Since households needed to be visited on a weekly/ biweekly basis, convenient sampling was majorly used. 1. Primary Data

The data was collected on the following parameters: Age Gender SEC categories Pain suffered Pain relieving gel used Frequency of pain.
20

This data formed the preliminary criteria for acceptance of the individual as a respondent for Fenak gel. The target population being 25-45 years, SEC category being A, B or C, pain relieving gel being Volini/Moov. If the individual fulfilled the following criteria, he was considered as a respondent otherwise the questionnaire was discarded.

Then, the data was collected on the following data with respect to an ideal pain reliever and brand used. The criteria were:

Color Smell Ease of absorption Pain relieving ability/ Efficacy Quickness of relief Sensation

The respondent was asked to state reasons on why the smell was important/ not important to him and what he thinks of the strength of the smell of the used brand. If it was

Much too strong Strong Just okay Mild Too mild

After collecting the information stated, the respondent was given Fenak gel. He was convinced to use Fenak gel whenever he suffered from pain. He was contacted weekly and was asked if he used the gel or not. Prior to the usage, the respondent was asked to give his rating on the same parameters, as were the parameters of the used brand, i.e,

21

Color Smell Ease of absorption Pain relieving ability/efficacy Quickness of relief Sensation

The respondent was asked what he thinks about the smell of the Fenak gel, weather he liked it, or though it was too mild, or did not like it at all etc. The respondent was also asked if he would like to purchase the gel, if it was launched in the market, or not. He was asked to give suggestions and tell more about his key likes and dislikes regarding the Fenak gel. The data so collected was fed into SPSS and Excel and analyzed.

2. Secondary data Already existing data is called secondary data. I collected them by following method: Internet Manta.com, Chemnet.com, worldofchemicals.com and

Linkedin.com Published Reports Search Engine Official websites of manufacturers and suppliers.

3.4

Research Hypothesis

H0: Fenak gel is not acceptable to the majority of customers H1: Fenak gel is acceptable to the majority of customers

3.5 Instrument Used Following softwares has been used during collecting, analysis and compiling of data. SPSS Microsoft Excel Google Scholar

22

This study was carried out through a set of self-administered questionnaires. A sample questionnaire is attached in Appendix.

3.6 Pilot Study The pilot study was done for the first 15 respondents and seen if any ambiguous or vague question/ responses were recorded. Various alterations were done till the time a full-fledged, clear cut questionnaire was prepared and used as the basis for data collection. 3.7 Data Analysis

Data Analysis was done using SPSS 16.0 for Windows. SPSS is a computer program used for survey authoring and deployment, data mining, text analytics, statistical analysis. Statistics used:Descriptive Statistics: Cross Tabulation, Frequencies, Custom Tables 3.8 Limitations 1. Inaccessibility to all published report due to high cost. 2. Communication barrier. 3. Limited time and resources.

23

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

4.1

Age of the respondent

The target population was 25-45 years. So the population considered in this research composed of 92% of the population belonging to the TG of 25-45 years

Figure 4.01- age of the respondent The statistics were:<25 = 1 25-35= 35 35-45= 57 >45= 7 n=100 4.2 Gender of the respondent.

The sample considered was composed of 35% males and 65% females.

Figure 4.2- gender of the respondent

24

4.3

SEC category The target population composed of people belonging to SEC A, B, C. Results have shown that majority of respondents belong to SEC A category (85%)

Figure 4.03- SEC category of the respondent The statistics obtained were:-

SEC A1- 50% SEC A2- 35% SEC B1- 7% SEC B2- 6% SEC C- 2% n= 100

4.4

Type of pain that the respondent suffers from:-

From the sample of 100, it was found out that 37% respondents suffered from joint pain 44% respondents suffered from back pain 24% from neck/shoulder pain 30% from sprains and strains.

25

4.5

Frequency of the pain that respondent suffers from:

Figure 4.4- frequency of pain The statistics were:1-At least 3-4 times in a week/ daily = 41% 2- Once in a week= 24% 3- Once in 15 days= 16% 4- Once in a month= 19% Therefore, we can say that the majority of the respondents, i.e., 41% respondents suffer for at least 3-4 times a week/ daily from pain.

4.6

What does the respondent applies to overcome such pain?

All the 100 users considered in the sample were gel users. But a few of them used oil, balm, spray too, along with the gel. The statistics show that: 11% respondents used oil too 1% applied balm 7% applied spray

26

4.7

Brand the respondent most often uses:

Figure 4.05- brand the respondent uses Out of total 100 respondents, 87% of the respondents were volini users while 13% were Moov users

4.8

Ranking given by the respondent towards various attributes with respect

to an ideal pain relieving gel/ cream:

a. Colour

Figure 4.06- rank for an ideal pain reliever 76% of the respondents said that colour is the least important attribute in an ideal pain reliever.

The statistics were:-

27

Top Box- 2% Bottom Box- 76% Mean Score- 1.43

Least Important - 76% Less Important - 15%

Not So Important- 3% Important Very Important Most Important N=100 - 4% - 0% - 2%

b.

Smell

Figure 4.07- rank for an ideal pain relievers smell The statistics show:-

Top Box= 0% Bottom Box= 9% Mean Score= 2.63

Least Important Less Important

- 9% - 48%

Not So Important - 21%

28

Important Very Important Most Important N=100

- 15% - 7% - 0%

We can say,

48% of the respondents said smell is less important wrt an ideal pain reliever

c.

Ease of absorption

Figure 4.08- rank for ease of absorption The statistics have shown:Least Important - 3% Less Important - 21%

Not So Important - 44% Important Very Important Most Important N=100 - 24% - 5% - 3%

29

Top Box= 3% Bottom Box= 3% Mean= 3.16 We can say that, 44% of the respondents say ease of absorption is not so important

d. Pain relieving ability/ efficacy

Figure 4.9- rank for ideal pain relievers efficacy

The statistics have shown:-

Top Box=28% Bottom Box= 0% Mean= 5.09

Least Important Less Important

- 0% - 4%

Not So Important - 1% Important Very Important Most Important N=100 Hence, 62% of the respondents said an ideal pain relievers efficacy is very important.
30

- 5% - 62% - 28%

e. Quickness of relief

Figure 4.10- rank for ideal pain relievers quickness of relief Top Box= 65% Bottom Box= 2% Mean= 5.36

Least Important - 2% Less Important - 3%

Not So Important- 2% Important Very Important Most Important N=100 - 8% - 20% - 65%

Therefore, for 65% of the respondents, quickness of relief is the most important attribute w.r.t. an ideal pain reliever.

31

f. Sensation

Figure 4.11- rank for an ideal pain relievers sensation The statistics have shown:Top Box=1% Bottom Box= 8% Mean= 3.43

Least Important Less Important

- 8% - 10%

Not So Important - 29% Important Very Important Most Important N=100 - 47% - 5% - 1%

Hence, 47% respondents considered sensation to be an important factor in an ideal pain reliever.

Observing the mean scores, we can say that, wrt an ideal pain reliever, respondents rank

32

1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6)

Quickness of relief- most important Efficacy Sensation - very important - important

Ease of absorption not so important Smell Color - less important - least important

4.9 Reasons why respondents felt smell is important/ not important in case of their ideal pain reliever:-

SMELL IS IMPORTANT (23%) RESPONDENT FEELS MORE THE SMELL, BETTER THE TREATMENT 23%

SMELL IS NOT SO IMPORTANT (77%) IT BECOMES THE EMBARRASEMENTCAUSE 30% OF

IT DOES NOT SUIT THE RESPONDENT( IRRITATION TO EYES, HEADACHE ETC)24% HANDS START SMELLING TOO 3% SMELL IS NOT IMPORTANT, ITS THE EFFICACY THAT MATTERS- 31% SMELL IS NOT IMPORTANT, IT IS THE SENSATION THAT NEEDS TO BE PRESENT 4%

Table 4.1- significance of smell

Hence, the majority, i.e., 77% respondents felt that smell is not important in their ideal pain reliever, the main reason being, that the efficacy is all that matters in a pain reliever. Smell does not hold that much importance.

33

4.10 Respondents feeling if a non smelling product would be okay or not?

Figure 4.12- if a non-smelling product is ok? The statistics were:Yes- 93% No- 7%

The people who said non smelling product is not required are the ones who

psychologically felt smell is necessary.

93% of the respondents feel that a non smelling product would be OK.

4. a.

Rating given by the respondents for their used brands on various attributes Colour

Figure 4.13- color of the respondents pain reliever The statistics show:Top Box-27%
34

Bottom Box-2% Mean-2.91

1) 2) 3) 4)

I Do Not Like It-2 Its Just About Okay-32 I Like It A Little-39 I Like It A Lot-27

N=100 b. Smell

Figure 4.14- rating for the smell of pain reliever The statistics show:Top Box-7% Bottom Box-50% Mean-1.77

I do not like it-50 Its just about okay-30 I like it a little-13 I like it a lot-7 n=100

35

c. Ease of absorption

Figure 4.15- rating for ease of absorption The statistics show:I Do Not Like It-23 Its Just About Okay-16 I Like It A Little-42 I Like It A Lot-19 N=100

Top Box-19% Bottom Box-23% Mean-2.52

Therefore, we can say, 42% respondents like the ease of absorption wrt the used brand d. Pain relieving ability/ efficacy

Figure 4.16- rating for efficacy of the used brand

36

The statistics show:I do not like it-1 Its just about okay-16 I like it a little-50 I like it a lot-33 n=100

Top Box- 33% Bottom Box- 1% Mean- 3.15 Thus, 50% respondents like the efficacy wrt the used brand. e. Quickness of relief

Figure 4.17- rating for quickness of relief of the used brand The statistics were:I do not like it-4 Its just about okay-13 I like it a little-40 I like it a lot-43 n=100

Top Box- 43% Bottom Box-4% Mean- 3.22 43% respondents like the quickness of relief a lot wrt the used brand
37

f.

Sensation

Figure 4.18- rating for the sensation of the used brand The statistics were:Top Box-33% Bottom Box-30% Mean- 2.43

I Do Not Like It-30 Its Just About Okay-20 I Like It A Little-27 I Like It A Lot-33 n=100 Thus, 33% respondents like the sensation a lot wrt the used brand 4.11 uses Rating given for the overall brand (used brand) the respondent currently

Figure 4.19- rating for the overall brand

38

The statistics show:I do not like it- 2 Its just about okay- 30 I like it a little- 46 I like it a lot- 22 n=100

Top Box-22% Bottom Box-2% Mean- 2.89

46% respondents like the overall brand.

4.12

Strength of the smell

Figure 4.20- strength of the smell

The statistics show:Much too strong- 43 (33 volini users, 10 moov users) A little too strong- 30 (28 volini users, 2 moov users) Just right- 25 (24 volini users, 1 moov user) A little too mild-2 (2 volini users) Much too mild- 0 n=100
39

Top Box=43 Bottom Box=0 Mean=4.96

Thus, 43% respondents feel the strength of the smell of their brand is too strong

4.13 Rating given for various attributes w.r.t the Fenak gel given to the respondents a. Colour

Figure 4.21- rating for the color of Fenak The statistics were:I do not like it-2 Its just about okay-17 I like it a little-30 I like it a lot-51 n=100

30% respondents like the colour of fenak

40

b.

Smell

Figure 4.22- rating for the smell of fenak The statistics have shown:Its just about okay- 15 I like it a little- 48 I like it a lot- 37 n=100

Thus, 48% respondents like the smell of fenak c. Ease of absorption

Figure 4.23- rating for the ease of absorption of fenak The statistics show the following ratings:I do not like it-1 Its just about okay-12 I like it a little- 48

41

I like it a lot- 39 n=100 48% respondents like the ease of absorption of fenak

d.

Efficacy

Figure 4.24- rating for efficacy of fenak The statistics show the following details:-

I do not like it- 24 Its just about okay-25 I like it a little- 30 I like it a lot- 21 n=100 e. Quickness of relief

Figure 4.25- rating for quickness of relief of fenak

42

The statistics were as shown:I do not like it-27 Its just about okay- 22 I like it a little- 34 I like it a lot- 17

f.

Sensation

Figure 4.26- rating for the sensation of fenak The statistics show the following details I do not like it-28 Its just about okay- 24 I like it a little- 29 I like it a lot- 19 n=100

4.14

Feedback of the respondents on the smell of fenak gel

1) 11% respondents feel that the change of smell in a pain relieving gel doesnt matter. Its the pain relieving ability/ efficacy that matters the most. 2) 11% respondents feel that the smell of Fenak gel is too mild. 3) 78% respondents really liked the smell of Fenak gel.

43

4.15

Rank given by the respondent to Fenak Gel

Figure 4.27- rank given for the fenak gel The statistics were:I do not like it- 13 Its just about okay- 27 I like it a little-45 I like it a lot- 15 n=100 5. If the respondents would like to purchase it or not:-

Figure 4.28- respondents who would like to purchase it The statistics were:Yes= 58% No=42%
44

Cross tabulations:1. Cross-tabulation between gender of the respondent and the age group to

which they belong Age BELOW 25 YRS 25- 35 YRS 35-45 YRS ABOVE 45 YRS MALES 0 16 16 3 FEMALES 1 19 41 4 TOTAL 1 35 57 7

Table 4.02- crosstab of gender and the age group of respondents

The majority of the respondents are females, belonging to the age group of 35-45 years. Herein, Total Males= 35 Total Females=65 Total=100

2. from AGE OF

Cross-tabulation between age of the respondent and pain he/she suffers

THE

JOINT PAIN

BACK/WAIST PAIN

NECK/SHOULDER PAIN

SPRAINS AND STRAINS

RESPONDENT

BELOW 25 YRS 25-35 YRS 35-45 YRS ABOVE 45 YRS

0 9 24 4

0 12 30 2

0 8 13 2

1 14 15 1

Table 4.03- crosstab of age and pain the respondent suffers from
45

Back pain is the most common type of pain followed by joint pain and the major sufferers belong to the age group of 35-45 years

3.

Cross- tabulation between gender of the respondent and the pain he/ she

suffers from GENDER JOINT PAIN BACK PAIN NECK/ SHOULDER PAIN SPRAINS AND STRAINS MALES FEMALES 10 27 17 27 9 15 11 19

Table 4.04- crosstab between gender and the pain the respondent suffers from

Herein, Males=35 Females=65 N= 100 This table shows that 17% males suffer from back pain while 27% of the females suffer from joint and back pain

4.

As we saw in the analysis, the respective mean scores of color, smell, ease of

absorption, efficacy, quickness of relief and sensation respectively, were, 1.43, 2.63, 3.16, 5.09, 5.36 and 3.43 Observing the mean scores, we can say that, wrt an ideal pain reliever, respondents rank Quickness of relief- most important Efficacy Sensation - very important - important

Ease of absorption not so important Smell Color - less important - least important

46

5. a.

Cross-tabulation between brand used and ideal pain relievers attributes Color

BRAND USED VOLINI MOOV TOTAL

LEAST IMP 66 10 76

LESS IMP 14 1 15

NOT SO IMP 3 0 3

IMP 4 0 4

VERY IMP 0 0 0

MOST IMP 0 2 2

TOTAL 87 13 100

Table 4.05- crosstab between brand used and color

Both Volini and Moov users show that color is the least important attribute in an ideal pain reliever.

b. BRAND USED VOLINI MOOV TOTAL

Smell LEAST IMP 8 1 9 LESS IMP 38 10 48 NOT SO IMP 21 0 21 IMP 13 2 15 VERY IMP 7 0 7 MOST IMP 0 0 0 TOTAL 87 13 100

Table 4.06- cosstab between brand used and smell

The majority of Volini and Moov users feel that the smell is a less important attribute w.r.t an ideal pain reliever

47

c.

Ease of absorption

BRAND USED VOLINI MOOV TOTAL

LEAST IMP 3 0 3

LESS IMP 21 0 21

NOT SO IMP 34 10 44

IMP 21 3 24

VERY IMP 5 0 5

MOST IMP 3 0 3

TOTAL 87 13 100

Table 4.7- crosstab between brand used and ease of absorption

The majority of Volini and Moov users think Ease of Absorption is a not so important attribute w.r.t. an ideal pain reliever.

d.

Efficacy

BRAND USED VOLINI MOOV TOTAL

LEAST IMP 0 0 0

LESS IMP 3 1 4

NOT SO IMP 1 0 1

IMP 5 0 5

VERY IMP 51 11 62

MOST IMP 27 1 28

TOTAL 87 13 100

Table 4.8- crosstab between brand used and efficacy

The majority of the respondents feel that efficacy is a very important attribute w.r.t an ideal pain reliever

48

e. BRAND USED VOLINI MOOV TOTAL

Quickness of relief LEAST IMP 1 1 2 LESS IMP 3 0 3 NOT SO IMP 2 0 2 IMP 7 1 8 VERY IMP 19 1 20 MOST IMP 55 10 65 TOTAL 87 13 100

Table 4.9- crosstab between brand used and quickness of relief

The majority of the Volini and Moov users feel that the Quickness of Relief is the most important attribute w.r.t an ideal pain reliever.

f. BRAND USED VOLINI MOOV TOTAL

Sensation LEAST IMP 7 1 8 LESS IMP 9 1 10 NOT SO IMP 26 3 29 IMP 40 7 47 VERY IMP 4 1 5 MOST IMP 1 0 1 TOTAL 87 13 100

Table 4.10- crosstab between brand used and sensation

The majority of the Volini and Moov users feel that sensation is an important factor w.r.t. an ideal pain reliever.

49

6. a. BRAND VOLINI MOOV

BIFURCATION WRT THE TWO BRANDS,I.E., MOOV AND VOLINI Color I DO NOT LIKE IT 1 1 ITS JUST ABOUT OK 30 2 I LIKE IT A LITTLE 33 6 I LIKE IT A LOT 23 4 TOTAL 87 13

Table 4.11- crosstab between brands and color

Majority of the Volini and Moov users feel that the color of their respective used gels were likeable

b. BRAND VOLINI MOOV

Smell I DO NOT LIKE IT 42 8 ITS JUST ABOUT OK 29 1 I LIKE IT A LITTLE 10 3 I LIKE IT A LOT 6 1 TOTAL 87 13

Table 4.12- crosstab between brands and Smell Majority of the Volini and Moov users feel that they dont like the smell of their respective gels.

c. BRAND VOLINI MOOV

Ease of absorption I DO NOT LIKE IT 19 4 ITS JUST ABOUT OK 12 4 I LIKE IT A LITTLE 39 3 I LIKE IT A LOT 17 2 TOTAL 87 13

Table 4.13- crosstab between brands and Ease of absorption

50

Majority of the Volini users find the ease of absorption of their gel likeable, whereas the Moov users do not like the ease of absorption or find it just about okay.

d. 4d5 VOLINI MOOV

Efficacy I DO NOT LIKE IT 1 0 ITS JUST ABOUT OK 13 3 I LIKE IT A LITTLE 42 8 I LIKE IT A LOT 31 2 TOTAL 87 13

Table 4.14- crosstab between the brands and Efficacy

Majority of the Volini and Moov users feel that Efficacy of their respective brands is likeable

e. BRAND VOLINI MOOV

Quickness of relief I DO NOT LIKE IT 3 1 ITS JUST ABOUT OK 10 3 I LIKE IT A LITTLE 33 7 I LIKE IT A LOT 41 2 TOTAL 87 13

Table 4.15- crosstab between brands and Quickness of Relief

Majority of the Volini users like the quickness of Relief of their brand a lot whereas Moov users find it just likeable

f. BRAND VOLINI MOOV

Sensation I DO NOT LIKE IT 26 4 ITS JUST ABOUT OK 16 4 I LIKE IT A LITTLE 26 1 I LIKE IT A LOT 19 4 TOTAL 87 13

Table 4.16- crosstab between brands and sensation of their respective brands
51

There exists a variation when we analyse this data, as majority percent of the Volini users do not like the sensation while the same percent like the sensation of Volini. On the other hand, equal percentage of Moov users find the sensation just about ok and like it a lot too.

1. For the used brand,(87% volini, 13% Moov), the most liked attribute is a) Quickness of relief b) Efficacy c) Ease of absorption d) Sensation

e) Color f) Smell

2. a.

Summary of fenak Top box

Attribute Color Smell Ease of absorption Efficacy Quickness of relief Sensation

Percentage 51% 37% 39% 21% 17% 19%

Table 4.17- summary of the top scores obtained for fenak gel

52

Hence we can say, that for the fenak gel, respondents believe that color was the best, followed by ease of absorption, smell, efficacy, sensation and then quickness of relief It is important to note that the quickness of relief was the most important factor w.r.t an ideal pain reliever, a condition which the Fenak gel does not fulfils

b.

Bottom box

Attribute Color Smell Ease of absorption Efficacy Quickness of relief Sensation

Percentage 2% 0% 1% 24% 27% 28%

Table 4.18- summary of the bottom scores w.r.t. Fenak gel This table of bottom box shows that sensation is the least liked attribute, followed by quickness of relief which is comparatively less liked, then efficacy, color, ease of absorption and smell.

53

c. Mean scores

Attribute Color Smell Ease of absorption Efficacy Quickness of relief Sensation

Mean 3.3 3.2 3.25 2.48 2.31 2.39

Table 4.19- mean scores of attributes w.r.t the Fenak gel

According to this table, we can rate the attributes of Fenak gel on a scale of likeability, with the first being the most likeable and the last being the least likeable. These traits are:a. Color b. Ease of absorption c. Smell

d. Efficacy e. Sensation f. Quickness of relief

54

3. Brand used*attributes of fenak cross tabulation a. Color

Brand Volini Moov Total

I do not like it 2 0 2

Its just about okay 14 3 17

I like it a little 28 2 30

I like it a lot 43 8 51

Total 87 13 100

Table 4.20- crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the color of fenak

Majority of the Volini and Moov users liked the color of the Fenak gel a lot. Statistically, 40.1% of volini users loved the color of fenak in comparison to 61.5% of Moov users who feel the same.

b.

Smell

Brand Volini Moov Total

I do not like it 0 0 0

Its just about okay 14 1 15

I like it a little 44 4 48

I like it a lot 29 8 37

Total 87 13 100

Table 4.21- crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the smell of Fenak gel

Statistically, 50.5% volini users like the smell of fenak and 61.5% moov users like the smell a lot

55

c. Brand Volini Moov Total

Ease of absorption I do not like it 1 0 1 Its just about okay 9 3 12 I like it a little 46 2 48 I like it a lot 31 8 39 Total 87 13 100

Table 4.22- crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the Ease of Absorption of Fenak Gel Statistically, 52.1% volini users find fenak as very easy to absorb as compared to 61.5% of moov users

d. Efficacy Brand Volini Moov Total I do not like it 22 2 21 Its just about okay 19 6 25 I like it a little 29 1 30 I like it a lot 17 4 21 Total 87 13 100

Table 4.23- crosstab of brand used and their opinion on the Efficacy of Fenak gel Statistically, 33.33% volini users like the efficacy of fenak and 46% moov users find it to be just okay. e. Quickness of relief Brand Volini Moov Total I do not like it 23 4 27 Its just about okay 18 4 22 I like it a little 32 2 34 I like it a lot 14 3 17 Total 87 13 100

Table 4.24- crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the quickness of relief of fenak
56

Statistically, 36.7% volini users like the ability of fenak gel to give quickness of relief as compared to 30.7% of moov users

f. Brand Volini Moov Total

Sensation I do not like it 25 3 28 Its just about okay 21 3 24 I like it a little 27 2 29 I like it a lot 14 5 19 Total 87 13 100

Table 4.25-crosstab of the brand used and their opinion on the sensation of fenak

Statistically, 31% volini users like the sensation of fenak, whereas, 38.4% moov users liked the sensation of fenak gel a lot

4.

The following crosstab shows that how much percentage of Volini and Moov

users would or would not like to purchase the Fenak gel.

BRAND VOLINI MOOV TOTAL

YES 53 5 58

NO 34 8 42

TOTAL 87 13 100

Table 4.26- crosstab of brand used and if the respondents would like to purchase Fenak or not

This shows that Volini users do like the new Fenak gel but majority of Moov users would like to stick to their own brands.

57

5.

Reasons the respondents would/ would not like to purchase fenak

Respondents Would purchase Because of no smell Because of good efficacy Because of good absorption/ sensation

Percentage (n=100) 46% 35% 18%

Table 4.27- reasons to purchase Fenak

Respondents Would not purchase Because of no smell Because efficacy is not good Because of no absorption/ sensation

Percentage (n=100) 8% 41% 11%

Table 4.28- reasons for not to purchase Fenak

We can conclude by saying that the major reason for buying fenak, if launched, would be the no smell attribute. On the other hand, the major reason for not buying Fenak is that it has a poor efficacy.

58

CHAPTER-5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusion

Hence, in a nutshell, Fenak got mixed responses but majority of the people(58%) like it. The major reason for liking it was a) The efficacy b) The perfumed smell

Statistically, 60.9% of volini users would like to buy Fenak gel and only 38.4% of moov users would like to buy the fenak gel.

Those who did not like fenak,(42%), the major arguments put across were:a) Less (no) efficacy/ quickness of relief. b) No sensation ( psychological)

If we see the statistics, we can say that out of the volini users, 39.1% respondents say they do not want to purchase the Fenak gel and out of the Moov users, 61.6% respondents say they do not want to purchase Fenak gel.

5.2 Recommendations

a) Fenak may be launched but before that the efficacy of the gel needs to be checked again as 42 against 58 is not a less number. b) The smell attribute is a very well accepted attribute among the target group hence the idea must be taken forward

59

References

Journals Gillian A. Bendelow1, Simon J. Williams (2010) Pain-related emotions modulate experimental pain perception and autonomic responses,

Inderscience Publishers A. Vania Apkarian, M. Catherine Bushnell, Rolf-Detlef Treede, Jon-Kar Zubieta, ( 2008) Human brain mechanisms of pain perception and regulation in health and disease Department of Physiology, Northwestern University Medical School, 303 E. Chicago Avenue, Ward 5-003, Chicago, IL 60611, USA Moskowitz et al., (1976); Sulmont et al., (2002) Department of Anesthesia, McGill University, Montreal, Canada Institute of Physiology Mainz, and

Pathophysiology,

Johannes

Gutenberg

University,

Germany

Department of Psychiatry and Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, The Basis Of Odor Effects On Pain: A Review And Investigation Of Conditioned Odor Effects, Changing Odor Hedonic Perception Through Emotional Associations in Humans John Prescott, Phd School Of Pscyhology, James Cook University Cairns, Australia, September, (2006) Cognitive modulation of pain: How do attention and emotion inuence pain processing? Chantal Villemure, M. Catherine Bushnell*, Anesthesia Research Unit and Faculty of Dentistry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Internet 1) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0304395986901193 2) http://www.senseofsmell.org/research/J.Prescott-White-Paper-AnalgesicEffects-Frag.pdf 3) http://www.apkarianlab.northwestern.edu/publications/Papers/200508_Apkari an.pdf 4) www.wikipedia.org

60

Appendix Research Questions

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR MARKETING RESEARCH

Please answer the following questions by ticking the relevant number or writing down the answer in the space provided.

SECTION A

1. 2. a. b. c. d. 3. a. b.

Name _____________________________________ Age of the respondent? Below 25 years 25-35 years 35-45 years Above 45 years Gender Male Female

4.

ASK ALL Could you please tell me the occupation of the Chief Wage Earner of Code your household? By Chief Wage Earner I mean the person who (330) contributes maximum to the income of your household PROBE (IF RETIRED THEN ASK FOR PREVIOUS OCCUPATION) CLARIFY AND WRITE VERBATIM FIRST THEN CODE IN GRID OCCUPATION OF _________________________________[SA
61

Route

CWE

Unskilled worker Skilled worker Petty trader Shop owner

..................................................................................................... 01 ......................................................................................................... 02 .............................................................................................................. 03 .............................................................................................................. 04 .................................................... 05 .................................................... 06 ................................................... 07

Businessman/Industrialist with - No employees Businessman/Industrialist with - 1-9 employees Businessman/Industrialist with - 10+ employees Self-Employed Professional Clerical / Salesman Supervisory Level

.................................................................................... 08

.................................................................................................. 09 .................................................................................................... 10 ....................................................................................... 11 ........................................................................ 12

Officer/Executive- Junior

Officer/Executive- Middle / Senior

5.

ASK ALL Could you please tell me the level of education of the Chief Wage Earner of Code your household? By Chief Wage Earner I mean the person who contributes (332) maximum to the income of your household PROBE CLARIFY AND WRITE VERBATIM FIRST AND THEN CODE IN GRID. EDUCATION OF CWE [SA] Illiterate :__________________________________ Route

............................................................................................... 1 .................................................................................. 2 ............................................................................. 3 ...................................................................... 4

Literate but no formal schooling School upto 4 years School upto 5 to 9 years

62

SSC / HSC

........................................................................................... 5 ................................. 6

Some college but not Graduate (Incl. Diploma)

Graduate / Post graduate - General (e.g. B.A., B.Sc., B.Com., M.A., M.Com.) .............................................................................................................................. 7 Graduate / Post graduate - Professional (e.g. B.E., B.Tech., M.Tech., C.A., M.B.B.S., L.L.B., MBA) .................................................................................................... 8

6. 1 EDU 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

OCCUPATION

Illiterat Literate School School SSC / Some Gradua but no upto 4 5 to 9 HSC College te / e formal years but not Post years schooli graduat Gradua te ng e General 01 02 03 04 E2 E2 E2 D D C B1 D E2 E1 D D C B2 B1 D E2 E1 D D C B2 B1 D E1 D D C B2 B2 A2 D D C C B2 B1 B1 A2 B2 D C C B1 A2 A2 A1 B1 D B2 B2 A2 A2 A1 A1 A2

Graduate / Post Graduate Profession al D B2 B2 A2 A1 A1 A1 A1

Unskilled Worker Skilled Worker Petty Trader Shop Owner

None (05) Businessmen / Industrialist Number 1-9 (06) Of Employees 10 + (07) Self Employed 08 Professional Clerical/ 09 Salesman

B2

B1

B1

63

Supervisory Level Officers/ Executives Junior Officers/ Executives Middle / Senior

10

B2

B1

A2

11

B2

B1

A2

A2

12

B1

B1

B1

B1

B1

A2

A1

A1

7. a. b. c. d. e.

Which type of pain do you suffer from? Joint pain Back/waist pain Neck/shoulder pain Sprains and strains Any other ___________________

If headache, stomach pain, etc., then discard. 8. a. b. c. d. e. What is the frequency of your pain? At least 3-4 times in a week/ Daily Once in a week Once in 15 days Once in a month Once in 3 months

If the answer to 8th question is e. then, terminate the questionnaire, otherwise, proceed. 9. a) b) c) d) e) f) g) What do you apply to overcome such pain? Gel/ Cream Oil Balm Spray Heating pad/ Hot bottle Do nothing Any other ____________________
64

10. a) b) c) I. II. III. d) e) f)

Which brand do you use most often? Iodex (double power) Ranbaxy Volini Moov Neck and shoulder Regular Cream No massage Zandu Amrutanjan Any other ( please mention)

If the answer is b) or c) then proceed.

SECTION B 11. On a scale of 1-6 please rank the following attributes of an ideal pain relieving gel/cream, 1 being the least favorable and 6 being the most favorable attribute a) Color b) Smell c) Easy to absorb d) Pain relieving ability/ Efficacy e) Quickness of relief f) Sensation

12. Why important (4-6) or not important (1-3) is smell in case of your ideal pain reliever cream?

13.

Would a non smelling product be ok?

65

14. You said that you are currently using ___________________ , On a 4 point scale, please rate the following attributes, where, 1=I do not like it 2=Its just about okay 3=I like it a little 4=I like it a lot

Color a. b. c. d. e. Smell Easy to absorb Pain relieving ability/ Efficacy Quickness of relief Sensation

15. On a scale of 1-4, please rank your likeability towards the overall brand _______________, where, 1=I do not like it 2=Its just about okay 3=I like it a little 4=I like it a lot Answer ____ 16. a. b. c. d. e. What do you think about the strength of the smell? Much too strong A little too strong Just right A little too mild Much too mild.

SECTION C 17. On a 4 point scale, please rate the following attributes w.r.t the SAMPLE we have provided to you, where,
66

1=I do not like it 2=Its just about okay 3=I like it a little 4=I like it a lot Color a. b. c. d. e. Smell Easy to absorb Pain relieving ability/ Efficacy Quickness of relief Sensation

18.

Can you please tell me, why have you given a rank of _____ to the smell?

19. On a scale of 1-4, please rank your likeability towards the overall brand _______________, where, 1=I do not like it 2=Its just about okay 3=I like it a little 4=I like it a lot Answer ____ 20. a. b. Would you like to purchase it if we launched this in the market? Yes No

21.

Why yes/no? (key likes/dislikes)

Thank you very much for your co-operation in completing this questionnaire. Your response is valuable to us.
67

68