Chiara Gasteiger1, Annie S K Jones1, Maria Kleinstäuber1,2, Maria Lobo3, Rob Horne4, Nicola Dalbeth3,5, Keith J Petrie1. 1. Department of Psychological Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. 2. Department of Psychological Medicine, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. 3. Department of Rheumatology, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand. 4. Centre for Behavioural Medicine, UCL School of Pharmacy, University College London, United Kingdom. 5. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patients may hold negative perceptions towards biosimilars which can create barriers to their uptake. Physicians also report uncertainty in how best to explain biosimilars. The aim of this study was to measure the effect of differently framed explanations on patients' perceptions of and willingness to change to a biosimilar in a hypothetical drug switch. METHODS:Ninety-six patients with rheumatic diseases taking an originator biologic were randomised to receive one of four biosimilar explanations - positive framing with and without an analogy, and negative framing with and without an analogy. Willingness to switch to a biosimilar, perceptions about biosimilars, and the effectiveness of the explanation were measured after the information delivery. RESULTS: Positive framing led to more participants being willing to switch (67%) than negative framing (46%). Framing significantly predicted willingness to switch to a biosimilar, with participants in the positive framing group being 2.36 times more willing to switch (P = 0.041). The positive framing group also reported significantly greater perceived efficacy of biosimilars (P = 0.046), and thought the explanation was more convincing (P = 0.030). The analogy did not enhance willingness to switch or understanding (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Positive framing can improve perceptions of and willingness to switch to a biosimilar in patients currently taking biologic treatments. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE:Patients may hold negative perceptions towards biosimilars which can create barriers to their uptake. Physicians also report uncertainty in how best to explain biosimilars. The aim of this study was to measure the effect of differently framed explanations on patients' perceptions of and willingness to change to a biosimilar in a hypothetical drug switch. METHODS: Ninety-six patients with rheumatic diseases taking an originator biologic were randomised to receive one of four biosimilar explanations - positive framing with and without an analogy, and negative framing with and without an analogy. Willingness to switch to a biosimilar, perceptions about biosimilars, and the effectiveness of the explanation were measured after the information delivery. RESULTS: Positive framing led to more participants being willing to switch (67%) than negative framing (46%). Framing significantly predicted willingness to switch to a biosimilar, with participants in the positive framing group being 2.36 times more willing to switch (P = 0.041). The positive framing group also reported significantly greater perceived efficacy of biosimilars (P = 0.046), and thought the explanation was more convincing (P = 0.030). The analogy did not enhance willingness to switch or understanding (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Positive framing can improve perceptions of and willingness to switch to a biosimilar in patients currently taking biologic treatments. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Authors: Arnold G Vulto; Isabelle Huys; Yannick Vandenplas; Steven Simoens; Florian Turk Journal: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Date: 2022-08-16 Impact factor: 3.686
Authors: Josef S Smolen; Roberto Caporali; Thomas Doerner; Bruno Fautrel; Fabrizio Benedetti; Burkhard Pieper; Minjun Jang Journal: RMD Open Date: 2021-06