Juliette Artignan, Kevin Diter, Pascal Clerc, Perrine Capmas, Nathalie Pelletier-Fleury
{"title":"How and Why Do Multimorbid Patients Decide to Follow Their Multiple Medication Prescriptions? Looking Beyond the Risk-Benefit Scale.","authors":"Juliette Artignan, Kevin Diter, Pascal Clerc, Perrine Capmas, Nathalie Pelletier-Fleury","doi":"10.1177/10497323241311508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Current public health guidelines emphasize the necessity to optimize medication prescriptions for multimorbid patients with multiple medications to ensure patient adherence while minimizing harm and waste. Nevertheless, there is limited understanding of how these patients choose to follow their medication regimen. This study aimed to describe the variations in the way patients account for their adherence (and non-adherence) to multiple medications and to draw links between these variations and patients' socioeconomic status. Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients aged 47-82 years with cardiovascular disease and multiple medically treated chronic conditions. They were transcribed and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. We first describe shared concerns about multiple medication taking and situations of medical uncertainty which arose when patients encounter conflicting medical instructions. We then highlight two overarching approaches through which patients conceptualized following their medical prescriptions. Some patients predominantly deferred the choice of medication to their physicians, while others steered the decision-making process and closely monitored what they were prescribed. These styles reflected different ways of engaging with doctors, dealing with side effects, and evaluating prescriptions and were linked to patients' socioeconomic status. We discuss our results by borrowing from Hirschman's theory of voice, exit, and loyalty. Findings argue in favor of better coordinated care to reduce prescription ambiguities and highlight the importance of patients with multimorbidity being given sufficient time and space to voice their concerns.</p>","PeriodicalId":48437,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Health Research","volume":" ","pages":"10497323241311508"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323241311508","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Current public health guidelines emphasize the necessity to optimize medication prescriptions for multimorbid patients with multiple medications to ensure patient adherence while minimizing harm and waste. Nevertheless, there is limited understanding of how these patients choose to follow their medication regimen. This study aimed to describe the variations in the way patients account for their adherence (and non-adherence) to multiple medications and to draw links between these variations and patients' socioeconomic status. Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients aged 47-82 years with cardiovascular disease and multiple medically treated chronic conditions. They were transcribed and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. We first describe shared concerns about multiple medication taking and situations of medical uncertainty which arose when patients encounter conflicting medical instructions. We then highlight two overarching approaches through which patients conceptualized following their medical prescriptions. Some patients predominantly deferred the choice of medication to their physicians, while others steered the decision-making process and closely monitored what they were prescribed. These styles reflected different ways of engaging with doctors, dealing with side effects, and evaluating prescriptions and were linked to patients' socioeconomic status. We discuss our results by borrowing from Hirschman's theory of voice, exit, and loyalty. Findings argue in favor of better coordinated care to reduce prescription ambiguities and highlight the importance of patients with multimorbidity being given sufficient time and space to voice their concerns.
期刊介绍:
QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH is an international, interdisciplinary, refereed journal for the enhancement of health care and to further the development and understanding of qualitative research methods in health care settings. We welcome manuscripts in the following areas: the description and analysis of the illness experience, health and health-seeking behaviors, the experiences of caregivers, the sociocultural organization of health care, health care policy, and related topics. We also seek critical reviews and commentaries addressing conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and ethical issues pertaining to qualitative enquiry.