Back

New Cardiovascular Medications: Surveying Adoption Trends Among Cardiologists

Varjabedian, L.; Mohammadi, A.; Mohammadi, A.; Vaseghi, Y.

2025-01-17 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2025.01.14.25320511 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionThis study investigates factors influencing the adoption of new cardiovascular medications by private practice cardiologists in Las Vegas, focusing on economic, clinical, and informational barriers. Understanding these challenges is critical for improving medication uptake and optimizing patient care. MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted between January 1 and February 1, 2024, targeting private practice cardiologists in Las Vegas. Out of 47 invited participants, 68% completed the questionnaire. The survey evaluated economic barriers, patient considerations, and preferred methods of learning about new treatments. ResultsThe survey revealed that 54% of cardiologists adopt new medications within 2-6 months of approval, while fewer adopt them within 2 months or after 6-12 months. Economic barriers, particularly prior authorization requirements and high patient copays, were the most frequently reported challenges, surpassing concerns about clinical benefits or medication safety. Traditional conferences and professional society events emerged as the preferred sources of information for learning about new treatments, significantly outweighing reliance on digital platforms or pharmaceutical representatives. DiscussionEconomic factors, such as prior authorizations and copays, significantly delay the adoption of new cardiovascular medications. Cardiologists show a strong preference for formal educational resources, such as conferences and professional society events, over pharmaceutical outreach or digital platforms. Addressing these barriers requires streamlining administrative processes, reducing patient copays, and improving access to high-quality educational events. Collaboration between insurers, medical societies, and healthcare providers is essential to overcoming these obstacles and enhancing patient outcomes.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.