Embracing the Complexity of the Gut Health Market

Embracing the Complexity of the Gut Health Market

Embracing the Complexity of the Gut Health Market

Executive Summary

The market for digestive health products has grown to ~$44Bn, driven largely by increased evidence and awareness surrounding the microbiome and probiotics. That said, a healthy digestive system requires more than just a healthy microbiome, and a multitude of other factors outside of the microbiome can influence digestive health. Increased consumer demand for holistic health products means consumer needs also extend beyond the microbiome. Probiotics are therefore in competition with a vast array of other products. The result is a fragmented market with a large number of companies marketing various solutions all claiming to aid gut health.

In such a fragmented market, companies can employ various different strategies to differentiate. These include 1) creating combination products of multiple in-demand ingredients 2) marketing superior quality and evidence, particularly towards healthcare professionals. Creating a successful differentiation strategy will require more in-depth customer research and segmentation than traditional approaches.

What is gut health? Beyond the microbiome

Gut health, or digestive health, is a hot topic right now. A 2022 survey by the IFIC (International Food Information Council) of the American population found that one in four Americans considered gut health to be the most important aspect of their overall health1. Commercially, a report by Grand View Research valued the global digestive health market at USD 44.4 billion in 2022 and predicted it to grow at a CAGR of 8.2% until 20302. Academically, a search for the term “gut health” on google scholar now produces over 70,000 results.

This begs the question, what is gut health? Despite increased interest, there exists no consensus definition, commercial or academic3. In popular discourse, the term is often considered synonymous with maintaining healthy and stable levels of gut bacteria, collectively known as your microbiome.

To nurture one’s microbiome, it is recommended to consume products containing “biotics”, either in the form of supplements or functional foods. Traditionally, these recommendations were limited to probiotics and prebiotics, but recent advancements in microbiome research have led to increased buzz around post-, para-, and synbiotics (a full explanation of these terms can be found below)*. There exists a growing body of evidence that consuming biotics is linked with a large range of GI health benefits4.

But the microbiome is only one piece of the puzzle. Although there is a large amount of evidence showcasing the role of the microbiome in gastrointestinal health5, it is not the only factor which determines whether an individual will experience gastrointestinal (GI) issues. For example, many autoimmune disorders can impact GI wellbeing independent of their effects on the microbiome6. An individual may also be genetically predisposed to be at a higher risk for GI diseases7 and symptoms, all without displaying any evidence of having a disrupted microbiome. Conversely, another individual may have an imbalance in their microbiome for years without displaying any symptoms. A comprehensive definition of gut health must therefore extend beyond having a stable microbiome.

Figure 1: displays a suggested mapping of four major categories with which we can think about gut health, whilst also acknowledging the interconnected nature of these categories.

The complex competitive landscape of all things gut-related

Consumer needs also extend beyond the microbiome. The shift towards a more holistic approach to health means that many consumers see gut health products as a means with which to achieve general health and well-being. The same IFIC survey found that, of the consumers who claimed to use biotics, only 51% cited “supporting their microbiome” as a reason for consumption*. Other reasons cited varied, but can broadly be classified into:

  • Promoting general wellness and health – namely through the absence and prevention of (GI) illness
  • Aiding digestion & reducing (GI) symptoms
  • Strengthening and supporting the immune system

*It is also likely that the 51% who claimed to use biotics for their microbiome do so in the hope of seeing tangible health benefits, such as preventing GI symptoms or illnesses in the future.

These are many of the same reasons consumers cite for the consumption of products more directly associated with gut health, such as digestive enzymes and fibre supplements, but also for products such as whole grains, fruits and vegetables, fermented foods, multivitamins, and other herbal supplements.

Recent research has also showcased the positive GI effects of a multitude of other ingredients. Notable examples include supplementing Vitamins D and B1 when managing inflammatory bowel disease8, the effects of supplementing both digestive enzymes and various herbal supplements (such as ginger) in treating a multitude of gastrointestinal symptoms9,10,11, and the role of minerals such as zinc in improving immune function12.

The result is a market containing a vast array of products, all with some degree of substitutability:

 

Figure 2: a non-exhaustive mapping of products competing in the gut health market by health claim, product category, and ingredients

Manufacturers looking to capture some of this rapidly growing market are competing along various lines including the health claim of their products, the ingredients, the product category (foods, functional foods, dietary supplements), and the distribution channel (supermarket, pharmacy, online). Despite some increased concentration in the supplement category due to high M&A activity, the market remains highly fragmented (notable transactions included Nestle’s acquisition of various Bountiful Company brands such as Puritan’s Pride and Nature’s Bounty, and Gryphon Investor’s acquisition of Metagenics). A large number of both regional and international manufacturers, many with an extensive portfolio of different solutions, are vying for market share.

This degree of fragmentation is what makes the market ripe with opportunity. With such a wide range of consumer needs, and a diverse set of products which are able to satisfy those needs, ample opportunities exist for manufacturers to differentiate themselves through their marketing, products, and channels. To do so requires a comprehensive understanding of the competition, the commercial landscape, and the profiles of their core customers.

To combine or not?

One attractive way for manufacturers to differentiate their products from the competition is through combining different in-demand ingredients into a single product. A notable example is the recent buzz surrounding synbiotic products, a combination of pre- and probiotics. Synbiotics are now projected to grow at a higher CAGR than the probiotics market13,14. Seed Health, a synbiotic start-up known for being endorsed by Gwyneth Paltrow’s brand ‘goop’, recently received $40m in series A funding with which they aim to go beyond the gut.

Many of the largest supplement manufacturers have also started to combine their biotic products with other ingredients including vitamins, minerals, and digestive enzymes. The packaging on these products often mentions other facets of gut health, such as relief of specific symptoms. Concerning functional foods, Activia recently launched their Activia plus range, which added Vitamins C, D, and Zinc to their probiotic yogurt drinks. The marketing materials focus heavily on the interconnectedness between gut health and the immune system.

 

Figure 3: various large manufacturers have chosen to combine multiple ingredients

Combining ingredients has a lot of distinct advantages beyond being able to make multiple health claims. It can help combat the choice overload consumers face when presented with so many options for their gut health, as well as help remove doubts as to whether they have chosen the correct solution. It can also help combat “pill burden” – the efforts associated with taking numerous pills on a daily basis – including storage, organisation, understanding what each pill does, and keeping track of potentially unwanted interactions. Finally, such a product might be able to command a premium price, whilst still being more cost efficient for consumers.

Nevertheless, combining ingredients comes with its own set of challenges and risks. There is a limit to the quantities of ingredients one can combine into a singular product without impacting the pleasant taste of a yogurt or keeping a pill at a swallowable size. The more ingredients one combines, the lower the dosage of each ingredient and the lower the potential efficacy of the product. Moreover, too many ingredients can also deter consumers; a long ingredient list can make a product seem less natural and therefore less appealing.

Manufacturers therefore need to be very selective in which ingredients they combine. It is crucial to choose these ingredients in a way that aligns with the wants and needs of their consumers. This in turn requires manufacturers to acquire an in-depth understanding of their customer base. To ensure a successful launch of a new combination product, it is essential to conduct scenario analysis grounded in extensive consumer research.

The role of the healthcare professional

Another angle along which manufacturers can differentiate is by targeting healthcare professionals (HCPs). Although HCPs are unlikely to prescribe gut health products outside of certain medicines to treat GI symptoms, they can be a key influence in driving patients to purchase out of pocket. The IFIC survey found that 43% of consumers would first turn to their healthcare professional to learn more about biotics. Targeting HCPs may allow manufacturers to justify a higher price point if consumers are willing to spend more for a product endorsed by their HCP.

Pure Encapsulations, a vitamin and mineral supplement manufacturer recently acquired by Nestle Health Science, are a tangible example of a company successfully employing this strategy. A 2017 study by the Institute of Functional Medicine found them to be “the most dispensed premium supplement brand by healthcare professionals.” To achieve this, their business strategy has focused on the importance of scientific evidence to build authority and gain the trust of HCPs . The company’s marketing and communications strongly emphasizes the fact that Pure has published over 50 articles in scientific journals. The company also offers both live and on-demand courses and webinars, aimed at HCPs wanting to learn more. For pharmacists interested in stocking Pure products, they promise double the margins of the average supplement.

But convincing HCPs is no easy task. Although four out of five HCPs do prescribe supplements to their patients15, creating brand loyalty requires a manufacturer to demonstrate both quality and efficacy.

HCPs are aware of the less-stringent regulations placed on supplements compared to medicines, resulting in supplements often containing less active ingredient than advertised, or not containing any of the ingredient at all. To assure quality, manufacturers need to make sure they adhere, and ideally exceed, the manufacturing standards set by regulating bodies in each of the countries they operate. Being transparent about their production process also helps to instil faith.

RCTs demonstrating clinical benefits, such as a reduction in GI symptoms, are considered the gold standard amongst HCPs to demonstrate efficacy. These can be very costly to conduct, as well as take a long time to complete. Alongside manufacturers conducting their own research, they should also make HCPs aware of all the existing evidence available on the relevant ingredient(s), so as to let them make an informed decision.

Due to the relative difficulty of targeting HCPs, a well-defined sales strategy is paramount. HCP attitudes and needs in relation to a product are likely to vary both within and between healthcare specialties. The first step in defining a sales strategy should therefore be to segment these HCPs, so as to then identify, quantify, and rank their needs.

We have a gut feeling we can help

Finding the right points of differentiation to compete in a fragmented market can be extremely challenging, but Sector & Segment can help uncover those features which resonate most with consumers and HCPs. The team at Sector & Segment have extensive experience in researching and quantifying the needs, attitudes, and preferences of both consumers and healthcare professionals.

We can leverage this experience to help you:

  • Identify, segment, and quantity your customer base
  • Translate customer insights into improving your product offering, pipeline, and positioning
  • Define, refine, and stress test your marketing and go-to-market strategies
  • Conduct competitive analysis to identify competitor value propositions and market gaps

Don’t hesitate to contact us at

*Biotics Explained

The term “biotics” is used to refer to any of the following:

  • Prebiotics – Molecules which selectively stimulate the growth or activity of microbes which are beneficial to health. The “food” for your gut bacteria.
  • Probiotics – Live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit to the host. The gut bacteria themselves.
  • Postbiotics – Metabolites produced by the microbiome, which confer a health benefit to the host. What your gut bacteria produces.
  • Synbiotics – A combination of pre-, pro-, or postbiotics.

Sources:

  1. International Food Information Council, 2022 Food and Health Survey, May 2022
  2. GVR: Probiotics Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis Report (2021 – 2030)
  3. Staudacher & Loughman (2021)
  4. Pandey et. al (2015)
  5. Durack & Lynch (2019)
  6. Cojocaru et. al (2011)
  7. Engstrand & Graham (2020)
  8. Masri et. al (2015)
  9. Ianiro et. al (2016)
  10. Giacosa et. al (2015)
  11. Lazzini et. al (2016)
  12. A. Prasad (2008)
  13. Mordor Intelligence: Synbiotics Market – Growth, Trends, COVID-19 Impact, and Forecasts (2022 – 2027)
  14. Mordor Intelligence: Probiotics Market – Growth, Trends, COVID-19 Impact, and Forecasts (2022 – 2027)
  15. Dickinson et. al (2009)
The Value of Segmentation in Healthcare

The Value of Segmentation in Healthcare

The Value of Segmentation in Healthcare

A trend towards the personalisation of medical care

Over the past decades, healthcare systems have been progressively shifting towards a more integrated and patient-centric approach to care. One form of this shift is tailoring treatments to the specific characteristics of the patient (e.g., phenotypes & genotypes), as evidenced by the framework created under the International Consortium for Personalized Medicine (ICPerMed). Another form, however, and the focus of this article, is the development of care-plans, products, and services that meet patients’ lifestyle needs and personal preferences in addition to clinical needs.

“…the importance of ‘what matters to someone’ is not just ‘what’s the matter with someone’. Since individuals’ values and preferences differ, ensuring choice and sharing control can meaningfully improve care outcomes.”

This second type of personalisation is increasingly being recognized by healthcare services. “Personalised care” is one of the five major practical objectives laid out by NHS England in their 2019 long-term plan, recognising that “…the importance of ‘what matters to someone’ is not just ‘what’s the matter with someone’. Since individuals’ values and preferences differ, ensuring choice and sharing control can meaningfully improve care outcomes.” In short, healthcare services seek to improve patient outcomes by both being more responsive to patient needs and providing patients with more agency.

This new mindset adds complexity to patient care and delivery of solutions: more stakeholders (patients and their caregivers) are now involved in care decision-making and non-clinical factors must be considered across hospital and community settings. These non-clinical factors, such as patient lifestyles and preferences, are much harder to measure for medical professionals, especially given the budget and staffing shortages faced in many healthcare systems. On the other hand, these challenges represent an opportunity for healthcare companies to enhance their own offerings.

Manufacturers also have an opportunity to play a role in creating long-term value for patients through personalization of care. Thanks to developments in telehealth services, app and web-based patient programmes and the integration of smart technology in wearable medical devices, companies can reach patients across a variety of channels and extend their services and product offerings more efficiently. This presents an opportunity to become the “partner of choice” with patients and caregivers along their journey.

Patient segmentation is now more important than ever

To take advantage of this opportunity, medical players are increasingly moving from a product to a patient-centric mindset. This requires developing a deeper understanding of psychological and behavioural facets of patients, and using that understanding to tailor services, communication materials, and products to wider patient needs.

Building this understanding is especially important in the case of body-modifying surgeries or wearable medical devices that can have long term repercussions on a patient’s self-image, confidence, and social life. It is common for patients to experience stigmas associated with living with an insulin pump for diabetic patients, with aids following hearing loss, or with an ostomy bag following a bladder or bowel resection. Needless to say, these patients have a complex set of personal, medical, and practical needs that require HCPs to engage on a deeper level and on topics that go beyond the learnings of a traditional curriculum or patient-approach.

Going down the Direct-To-Consumer communication (DTC) route may not be a suitable option for all Medical Supply or MedTech companies. For example, some companies have made a deliberate strategic choice to focus all their go-to-market efforts on Healthcare Professionals (HCPs) and payers in order to establish strong medical credibility and/or differentiate from Over-the-Counter (OTC) players. In other cases, local regulations may be restrictive and not allow for much direct communication to patients.

Yet, even in these varied cases and circumstances, building a deeper understanding of patients still represents an opportunity to develop tailored tools and services to support the work of HCPs and drive prescriptions and/or recommendations to their patients. In the UK, the NHS notes that “creating genuine partnerships requires professionals to work differently, as well as a systematic approach to engaging patients in decisions about their health and wellbeing”. To this end, HCPs have become more open to ad-hoc training and support tools to facilitate “the conversations which help patients make the decisions that are right for them”.

What we have learnt from recent segmentation work in medical devices

Sector & Segment recently conducted a large multi-country patient segmentation for one of our clients working in the field of medical devices with the goal of supplementing previous segmentation research on HCPs.

While interviewing HCPs, we learned that while clinical needs were assessed on a patient-by-patient basis, many HCPs divided their patients in terms of 1. broad age groups (18-30, 30-60 and over 60 years old) to assess lifestyle-related needs and 2. underlying medical conditions (chronic, acute, and emergency patients) to assess needs related to the level of psychological support required. This in turn would be used to determine how they would approach patients in terms of time and attention paid to address patients’ personal needs. For example, we found that HCPs spent more time with younger patients and were more likely to provide them with support on selecting a product that fit their daily life or with information on wider topics. By contrast, HCPs spent less time with “older” patients and prioritized meeting medical and practical needs, often overlooking the rest.

What we learnt working with patients, however, is that grouping them using broad segmentation criteria throws only a partial light on the challenges that they face, their needs, and the type of support that they seek along their journey.

1. Patient preferences and behaviours are complex, and age is not the sole factor when seeking to explain or predict them

While it is true that there are patient needs associated with age, like planning for a family or building a career, as well as practical challenges such as reduced dexterity and autonomy, those needs are not the sole determinant of patient behaviour. In our study, patients willing to engage with others about their condition and be proactive in researching information and products were equally present across all age groups. This revelation disproved our initial hypothesis that more mature patients were more likely to follow their HCPs recommendations rather than playing an active role in the decision making relating to their care. In fact, when looking at the distribution of behaviours and needs by age, the 60–75-year-old bracket had a similar distribution as other “younger” groups.

2. Needs and behaviours resulting from an underlying condition are not “set in stone” but can evolve over the course of the journey

A patient’s underlying condition plays a key role not only in determining their medical needs but also in shaping their emotional journey. Depending on their condition, patients may take a different approach preparing for and accepting the same surgical procedure. For example, if we consider the same surgical procedure conducted on three different types of patients: one with a chronic illness, one with cancer, and one involved in an accident, we will see different initial attitudes and behaviours.

  • For the chronic patient, the surgery may be a step in a long treatment after enduring years of pain, and they may be more mentally prepared for this event
  • For the cancer patient, this surgery could be just the beginning of their battle with cancer and represent uncertainty about the ultimate outcome
  • For a patient who underwent the same surgery as a result of an accident or trauma their initial reaction is likely to be shock due to the unexpected outcome

These differences in reactions, attitudes, and behaviours, however, are likely to change as the patient progresses through their journey. What we found, for example, is that trauma and oncology patients developed a more positive attitude towards the same procedure by the end of the second year, while chronic patients who were initially more positive in relative terms, took much longer to come to terms with their new life and required more constant support. This evolution in needs indicates the importance of breaking down the patient journey into phases and approaching each phase as an individual journey. Ultimately, this allows for a mapping of how needs and behaviours evolve over time and an opportunity to target patients with greater precision.

3. Furthermore, when patients present multiple comorbidities, behaviours/preferences associated with each condition may overlap or differ

A patient’s behaviours may not even be consistent when it comes to their approach to comorbidities. Our research has found that when patients have multiple comorbidities, they would often take on different behaviours and attitudes depending on the condition they are focused on, as well as prioritise one condition over another. This is commonly seen in chronic patients who often have several conditions or co-morbidities. For example, a diabetes patient may also have hypertension or cardiac disease, or a head & neck cancer patient may also have dysphagia. We have observed that patients with hypertension and diabetes are likely to prioritise hypertension because this represents the more serious condition which can lead to a heart attack, while diabetes has a slower progression and therefore a slower impact. In this case, a patient can be “proactive” towards their hypertension (engaging with HCPs, conducting their own research, connecting with other patients), while at the same time being “passive” towards their diabetes (not following the prescribed diet, not monitoring their glucose levels as closely, missing appointments). This further demonstrated the relevance of specific segmentations, since patients’ behaviours, attitudes and needs shift considerably between conditions and areas of care.

How not to lose a patient in 1 year

It probably doesn’t come as a surprise that over half of the patients in our research sample were dissatisfied with the level of information and support received from their HCP. They frequently found the support they received to be too generic or not relevant to their practical and emotional needs in that moment. Furthermore, they often did not follow their HCP product recommendation, switching to other manufacturers within one year from point of discharge.

From a manufacturer’s point of view, understanding who these patients are, why they stayed or why they switched and how they made this decision, can be paramount in setting out a sales and marketing strategy and developing detailed action plans.

Having well defined and quantifiable patient segments based on needs, channel of information and source of influence, as well as attitude and behaviours can help answer questions like:

  • What patient-segments should we prioritise?
  • What channels should we use to reach these patients more effectively and efficiently?
  • Do we already have products in the market to support these patients’ needs? How should we position our portfolio against patients’ needs? Should we prioritise some innovations over others? Do we need to rationalise our portfolio?
  • How can we offer more value to patients?

How we can help

Our experts can support your growth strategy by identifying and quantifying your customer segments, guiding your team to set priorities, develop tools and position your service and product offering for long-term success.

Contact Marie-Elisabeth Maigre (Consulting Director) at and Giada Garofalo (Director of Research) at to learn more.