Consultation-based interventions to optimize medication adherence in primary care: a systematic review.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Caitriona Callan, Jadine Scragg, Richard Stevens, Laura Heath, Isabella De Vere Hunt, Anna Seeley, Alexandra Caulfield, Paul Aveyard
{"title":"Consultation-based interventions to optimize medication adherence in primary care: a systematic review.","authors":"Caitriona Callan, Jadine Scragg, Richard Stevens, Laura Heath, Isabella De Vere Hunt, Anna Seeley, Alexandra Caulfield, Paul Aveyard","doi":"10.1093/fampra/cmag007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of consultation-based interventions on adherence to primary or secondary preventative medications and clinical outcomes. We focused on consultation-based interventions suitable for primary care settings, without needing specific technologies, and with reasonable time requirements of clinicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A database search was undertaken from 2015 onwards, supplemented by previous systematic reviews and citation-searching. Randomized trials targeting adults prescribed long-term medication for cardiovascular prevention, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), chronic respiratory disease, or osteoporosis were included. Interventions had to meet a priori eligibility criteria for implementation feasibility in primary care. Two reviewers screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB2 tool. Adherence and clinical outcomes were assessed, with meta-analyses conducted using inverse variance heterogeneity methods and sensitivity analyses to explore heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>41 studies (n = 26 114) were included. Meta-analysis showed significant adherence improvements for T2DM [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 1.11] and chronic respiratory disease (SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.38), but effects were not robust to sensitivity analyses. No significant adherence effects were observed for cardiovascular prevention nor osteoporosis. Interventions did not significantly improve clinical outcomes including systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein, HbA1c (after sensitivity analyses), respiratory symptoms, or hospitalization. High heterogeneity and study-level risk of bias limited certainty.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Consultation-based interventions may modestly improve medication adherence in T2DM and chronic respiratory disease, but there is no robust evidence of clinical benefit, nor evidence of effectiveness in other conditions. Intervention feasibility is an important consideration for guiding future research and translating it into practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12209,"journal":{"name":"Family practice","volume":"43 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13017097/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmag007","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of consultation-based interventions on adherence to primary or secondary preventative medications and clinical outcomes. We focused on consultation-based interventions suitable for primary care settings, without needing specific technologies, and with reasonable time requirements of clinicians.

Methods: A database search was undertaken from 2015 onwards, supplemented by previous systematic reviews and citation-searching. Randomized trials targeting adults prescribed long-term medication for cardiovascular prevention, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), chronic respiratory disease, or osteoporosis were included. Interventions had to meet a priori eligibility criteria for implementation feasibility in primary care. Two reviewers screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB2 tool. Adherence and clinical outcomes were assessed, with meta-analyses conducted using inverse variance heterogeneity methods and sensitivity analyses to explore heterogeneity.

Results: 41 studies (n = 26 114) were included. Meta-analysis showed significant adherence improvements for T2DM [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 1.11] and chronic respiratory disease (SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.38), but effects were not robust to sensitivity analyses. No significant adherence effects were observed for cardiovascular prevention nor osteoporosis. Interventions did not significantly improve clinical outcomes including systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein, HbA1c (after sensitivity analyses), respiratory symptoms, or hospitalization. High heterogeneity and study-level risk of bias limited certainty.

Conclusion: Consultation-based interventions may modestly improve medication adherence in T2DM and chronic respiratory disease, but there is no robust evidence of clinical benefit, nor evidence of effectiveness in other conditions. Intervention feasibility is an important consideration for guiding future research and translating it into practice.

以咨询为基础的干预措施优化初级保健的药物依从性:一项系统综述。
目的:综合基于咨询的干预措施对初级或二级预防药物依从性和临床结果的有效性的证据。我们专注于适合初级保健环境的基于咨询的干预措施,不需要特定的技术,并且临床医生有合理的时间要求。方法:从2015年开始进行数据库检索,并辅以之前的系统综述和引文检索。纳入了针对成人开具的长期心血管预防药物、2型糖尿病(T2DM)、慢性呼吸系统疾病或骨质疏松症的随机试验。干预措施必须满足在初级保健中实施可行性的先验资格标准。两位审稿人使用Cochrane RoB2工具筛选、提取数据并评估偏倚风险。对依从性和临床结果进行评估,并使用逆方差异质性方法和敏感性分析进行meta分析以探索异质性。结果:纳入41项研究(n = 26114)。荟萃分析显示,T2DM[标准化平均差(SMD) 0.60, 95%可信区间(CI) 0.10至1.11]和慢性呼吸系统疾病(SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.07至0.38)的依从性显著改善,但敏感性分析的效果并不稳健。在预防心血管疾病和骨质疏松方面没有观察到明显的依从性效果。干预措施没有显著改善收缩压、低密度脂蛋白、HbA1c(经敏感性分析)、呼吸系统症状或住院治疗等临床结果。高异质性和研究水平的偏倚风险限制了确定性。结论:以咨询为基础的干预可能会适度改善T2DM和慢性呼吸系统疾病患者的药物依从性,但没有强有力的临床益处证据,也没有证据表明在其他情况下有效。干预的可行性是指导未来研究和实践的重要考虑因素。
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
Family practice
Family practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
144
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Practice is an international journal aimed at practitioners, teachers, and researchers in the fields of family medicine, general practice, and primary care in both developed and developing countries. Family Practice offers its readership an international view of the problems and preoccupations in the field, while providing a medium of instruction and exploration. The journal''s range and content covers such areas as health care delivery, epidemiology, public health, and clinical case studies. The journal aims to be interdisciplinary and contributions from other disciplines of medicine and social science are always welcomed.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书