Improving Assessment of Adherence Behaviors and Drivers: Targeted Literature Review and Concept Elicitation Interviews in Multiple Countries and Disease Populations.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Patient preference and adherence Pub Date : 2024-06-17 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/PPA.S433662
Sarah Bentley, Elizabeth Exall, Lucy Morgan, Nicolas Roche, Kamlesh Khunti, Rebecca Rossom, James Piercy, Rob Arbuckle, Victoria S Higgins
{"title":"Improving Assessment of Adherence Behaviors and Drivers: Targeted Literature Review and Concept Elicitation Interviews in Multiple Countries and Disease Populations.","authors":"Sarah Bentley, Elizabeth Exall, Lucy Morgan, Nicolas Roche, Kamlesh Khunti, Rebecca Rossom, James Piercy, Rob Arbuckle, Victoria S Higgins","doi":"10.2147/PPA.S433662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Medication adherence is crucial for achieving clinical goals. Medication adherence drivers and behaviors were explored across multiple conditions, countries, and medication schedules/modalities to develop a conceptual model of medication adherence, which could later be used to support development of a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure of adherence.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Targeted review of qualitative literature identified important medication adherence concepts. Fifty-seven qualitative concept elicitation interviews were conducted (USA n=21, Spain n=18, Germany n=18). Participants were prescribed medication for: hypertension (n=9), asthma (n=8), multiple myeloma (n=8), psoriasis (n=8), diabetes (n=7), depression (n=7), multiple sclerosis (n=7), and/or schizophrenia (n=6). Thematic analysis of verbatim transcripts was performed. Expert clinicians (n=3) provided input throughout.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine qualitative articles were selected for review from 2168 screened abstracts. Forty-two medication adherence concepts were reported and grouped into 10 domains. Eight forms of medication adherence were reported during interviews, along with 27 drivers of non-adherence, all of which were incorporated into a conceptual model. Participants reported skipping medication doses (n=36/57; 63.2%) or taking medication later in the day than prescribed (n=29/57; 50.9%). Common drivers of non-adherence included forgetfulness (n=35/57; 61.4%), being out of the usual routine (n=31/57; 54.4%) and being busy (n=22/57; 38.6%). US participants were more likely to report non-adherence due to low perceived efficacy (n=6/21, 28.6%) and cost (n=5/21, 23.8%) than German (n=1/18, 5.6%; n=0/18, 0.0%) or Spanish (n=2/18, 11.1%; n=1/18, 5.6%) participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings highlight the diverse forms and drivers of medication non-adherence, informing the development of a comprehensive conceptual model of medication adherence. The conceptual model builds on and advances previous models of medication adherence and can be used by healthcare professionals to understand and interpret barriers to medication adherence and how best to support patients in taking their medication as intended.</p>","PeriodicalId":19972,"journal":{"name":"Patient preference and adherence","volume":"18 ","pages":"1231-1242"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11192640/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient preference and adherence","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S433662","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Medication adherence is crucial for achieving clinical goals. Medication adherence drivers and behaviors were explored across multiple conditions, countries, and medication schedules/modalities to develop a conceptual model of medication adherence, which could later be used to support development of a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure of adherence.

Patients and methods: Targeted review of qualitative literature identified important medication adherence concepts. Fifty-seven qualitative concept elicitation interviews were conducted (USA n=21, Spain n=18, Germany n=18). Participants were prescribed medication for: hypertension (n=9), asthma (n=8), multiple myeloma (n=8), psoriasis (n=8), diabetes (n=7), depression (n=7), multiple sclerosis (n=7), and/or schizophrenia (n=6). Thematic analysis of verbatim transcripts was performed. Expert clinicians (n=3) provided input throughout.

Results: Nine qualitative articles were selected for review from 2168 screened abstracts. Forty-two medication adherence concepts were reported and grouped into 10 domains. Eight forms of medication adherence were reported during interviews, along with 27 drivers of non-adherence, all of which were incorporated into a conceptual model. Participants reported skipping medication doses (n=36/57; 63.2%) or taking medication later in the day than prescribed (n=29/57; 50.9%). Common drivers of non-adherence included forgetfulness (n=35/57; 61.4%), being out of the usual routine (n=31/57; 54.4%) and being busy (n=22/57; 38.6%). US participants were more likely to report non-adherence due to low perceived efficacy (n=6/21, 28.6%) and cost (n=5/21, 23.8%) than German (n=1/18, 5.6%; n=0/18, 0.0%) or Spanish (n=2/18, 11.1%; n=1/18, 5.6%) participants.

Conclusion: Findings highlight the diverse forms and drivers of medication non-adherence, informing the development of a comprehensive conceptual model of medication adherence. The conceptual model builds on and advances previous models of medication adherence and can be used by healthcare professionals to understand and interpret barriers to medication adherence and how best to support patients in taking their medication as intended.

改进对坚持治疗行为和驱动因素的评估:在多个国家和疾病人群中进行有针对性的文献综述和概念激发访谈。
目的:坚持用药对于实现临床目标至关重要。研究人员对多种疾病、多个国家以及用药计划/方式的用药依从性驱动因素和行为进行了探讨,以建立一个用药依从性的概念模型,该模型随后可用于支持开发患者报告的用药依从性结果(PRO)测量方法:有针对性地查阅定性文献,确定重要的用药依从性概念。进行了 57 次定性概念激发访谈(美国 21 人,西班牙 18 人,德国 18 人)。参与者的处方药包括:高血压(9 人)、哮喘(8 人)、多发性骨髓瘤(8 人)、银屑病(8 人)、糖尿病(7 人)、抑郁症(7 人)、多发性硬化症(7 人)和/或精神分裂症(6 人)。对逐字记录誊本进行了主题分析。专家临床医师(n=3)全程提供意见:从筛选出的 2168 篇摘要中挑选出 9 篇定性文章进行审查。报告了 42 个用药依从性概念,并将其分为 10 个领域。访谈中报告了八种坚持用药的形式,以及 27 种不坚持用药的驱动因素,所有这些都被纳入了一个概念模型。参与者报告了漏服药物(n=36/57;63.2%)或比处方晚服药(n=29/57;50.9%)的情况。导致不坚持服药的常见原因包括健忘(n=35/57;61.4%)、不按常规服药(n=31/57;54.4%)和忙碌(n=22/57;38.6%)。与德国(n=1/18,5.6%;n=0/18,0.0%)或西班牙(n=2/18,11.1%;n=1/18,5.6%)参试者相比,美国参试者更有可能因认为疗效低(n=6/21,28.6%)和费用高(n=5/21,23.8%)而不坚持治疗:研究结果凸显了不坚持用药的不同形式和驱动因素,为制定坚持用药的综合概念模型提供了依据。该概念模型建立在以往的用药依从性模型基础上并有所发展,医护人员可利用该模型了解和解释用药依从性的障碍,以及如何最好地支持患者按计划服药。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Patient preference and adherence
Patient preference and adherence MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
354
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Patient Preference and Adherence is an international, peer reviewed, open access journal that focuses on the growing importance of patient preference and adherence throughout the therapeutic continuum. The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of reviews, original research, modeling and clinical studies across all therapeutic areas. Patient satisfaction, acceptability, quality of life, compliance, persistence and their role in developing new therapeutic modalities and compounds to optimize clinical outcomes for existing disease states are major areas of interest for the journal. As of 1st April 2019, Patient Preference and Adherence will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信