Cargando…

Physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES: To examine physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: MedLine Ovid and Scopus databases at the end of 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Original scientific studies written in English that addressed physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of bio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sarnola, Kati, Merikoski, Merja, Jyrkkä, Johanna, Hämeen-Anttila, Katri
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228507/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32371511
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034183
_version_ 1783534600173125632
author Sarnola, Kati
Merikoski, Merja
Jyrkkä, Johanna
Hämeen-Anttila, Katri
author_facet Sarnola, Kati
Merikoski, Merja
Jyrkkä, Johanna
Hämeen-Anttila, Katri
author_sort Sarnola, Kati
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To examine physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: MedLine Ovid and Scopus databases at the end of 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Original scientific studies written in English that addressed physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The search resulted in altogether 451 studies and 331 after removing duplicates. Two researchers examined these based on the title, abstract and entire text, resulting in 20 studies. The references in these 20 studies were screened and three further studies were included. The data of these 23 studies were extracted. All the publications were quality assessed by two researchers. RESULTS: Most of the selected studies were conducted in Europe and commonly used short surveys. Physicians’ familiarity with biosimilars varied: 49%–76% were familiar with biosimilars while 2%–25% did not know what biosimilars were, the percentages varying from study to study. Their measured knowledge was generally more limited compared with their self-assessed knowledge. Physicians’ perceptions of biosimilars also varied: 54%–94% were confident prescribing biosimilars, while 65%–67% had concerns regarding these medicines. Physicians seemed to prefer originator products to biosimilars and prescribed biosimilars mainly for biologic-naive patients. They considered cost savings and the lower price compared with the originator biologic medicine as the main advantages of biosimilars, while their doubts were often related to safety, efficacy and immunogenicity. 64%–95% of physicians had negative perceptions of pharmacist-led substitution of biologic medicines. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians’ knowledge of and attitudes towards biosimilars vary. Although physicians had positive attitudes towards biosimilars, prescribing was limited, especially for patients already being treated with biologic medicines. Perceptions of pharmacist-led substitution of biologic medicines were often negative. Education and national recommendations for switching and substitution of biologic medicines are needed to support the uptake of biosimilars.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7228507
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72285072020-05-18 Physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review Sarnola, Kati Merikoski, Merja Jyrkkä, Johanna Hämeen-Anttila, Katri BMJ Open Health Policy OBJECTIVES: To examine physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: MedLine Ovid and Scopus databases at the end of 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Original scientific studies written in English that addressed physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The search resulted in altogether 451 studies and 331 after removing duplicates. Two researchers examined these based on the title, abstract and entire text, resulting in 20 studies. The references in these 20 studies were screened and three further studies were included. The data of these 23 studies were extracted. All the publications were quality assessed by two researchers. RESULTS: Most of the selected studies were conducted in Europe and commonly used short surveys. Physicians’ familiarity with biosimilars varied: 49%–76% were familiar with biosimilars while 2%–25% did not know what biosimilars were, the percentages varying from study to study. Their measured knowledge was generally more limited compared with their self-assessed knowledge. Physicians’ perceptions of biosimilars also varied: 54%–94% were confident prescribing biosimilars, while 65%–67% had concerns regarding these medicines. Physicians seemed to prefer originator products to biosimilars and prescribed biosimilars mainly for biologic-naive patients. They considered cost savings and the lower price compared with the originator biologic medicine as the main advantages of biosimilars, while their doubts were often related to safety, efficacy and immunogenicity. 64%–95% of physicians had negative perceptions of pharmacist-led substitution of biologic medicines. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians’ knowledge of and attitudes towards biosimilars vary. Although physicians had positive attitudes towards biosimilars, prescribing was limited, especially for patients already being treated with biologic medicines. Perceptions of pharmacist-led substitution of biologic medicines were often negative. Education and national recommendations for switching and substitution of biologic medicines are needed to support the uptake of biosimilars. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7228507/ /pubmed/32371511 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034183 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Health Policy
Sarnola, Kati
Merikoski, Merja
Jyrkkä, Johanna
Hämeen-Anttila, Katri
Physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review
title Physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review
title_full Physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review
title_fullStr Physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review
title_short Physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review
title_sort physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review
topic Health Policy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228507/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32371511
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034183
work_keys_str_mv AT sarnolakati physiciansperceptionsoftheuptakeofbiosimilarsasystematicreview
AT merikoskimerja physiciansperceptionsoftheuptakeofbiosimilarsasystematicreview
AT jyrkkajohanna physiciansperceptionsoftheuptakeofbiosimilarsasystematicreview
AT hameenanttilakatri physiciansperceptionsoftheuptakeofbiosimilarsasystematicreview