Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: Biosimilars offer cost-effective alternatives to biologics in rheumatology; however, their adoption remains hindered by physician hesitancy and patient misconceptions. Despite increasing clinical use, knowledge gaps persist, affecting prescribing behaviors and treatment adherence. Objective: This study aimed to assess awareness, perceptions, and barriers to biosimilar adoption among rheumatologists and patients, identifying key factors influencing acceptance. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 22 rheumatologists and 66 patients in clinical rheumatology settings. Structured questionnaires evaluated demographic characteristics, familiarity with biosimilars, prescribing patterns, and patient acceptance. Data were analyzed using SPSS v25, employing chi-square tests and t-tests to assess statistical significance, with p-values <0.05 considered significant. Results: Among rheumatologists, 80% (n=18, p=0.021) were very familiar with biosimilars, and 75% (n=16, p=0.017) had received formal education, yet only 70% (n=15, p=0.015) had prescribed them. Among patients, 60% (n=40, p=0.003) rated their biosimilar knowledge as poor, and 55% (n=36, p=0.006) were unsure about their safety and efficacy. A significant gap in physician-patient communication was observed, with 65% (n=43, p=0.008) of patients never discussing biosimilars with their rheumatologist. Conclusion: Rheumatologists demonstrated strong biosimilar knowledge, yet prescribing reluctance persisted, while patients exhibited significant uncertainty and reliance on non-medical information. Targeted education and structured communication strategies are essential to improve biosimilar adoption, ensuring cost-effective and evidence-based treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Niaz et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: