Closing the quality gap: revisiting the state of the science (vol. 4: medication adherence interventions: comparative effectiveness).

Meera Viswanathan, Carol E Golin, Christine D Jones, Mahima Ashok, Susan Blalock, Roberta C M Wines, Emmanuel J L Coker-Schwimmer, Catherine A Grodensky, David L Rosen, Andrea Yuen, Priyanka Sista, Kathleen N Lohr
{"title":"Closing the quality gap: revisiting the state of the science (vol. 4: medication adherence interventions: comparative effectiveness).","authors":"Meera Viswanathan,&nbsp;Carol E Golin,&nbsp;Christine D Jones,&nbsp;Mahima Ashok,&nbsp;Susan Blalock,&nbsp;Roberta C M Wines,&nbsp;Emmanuel J L Coker-Schwimmer,&nbsp;Catherine A Grodensky,&nbsp;David L Rosen,&nbsp;Andrea Yuen,&nbsp;Priyanka Sista,&nbsp;Kathleen N Lohr","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the effectiveness of patient, provider, and systems interventions (Key Question [KQ] 1) or policy interventions (KQ 2) in improving medication adherence for an array of chronic health conditions. For interventions that are effective in improving adherence, we then assessed their effectiveness in improving health, health care utilization, and adverse events.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE®, the Cochrane Library. Additional studies were identified from reference lists and technical experts.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Two people independently selected, extracted data from, and rated the risk of bias of relevant trials and systematic reviews. We synthesized the evidence for effectiveness separately for each clinical condition, and within each condition, by type of intervention. We also evaluated the prevalence of intervention components across clinical conditions and the effectiveness of interventions for a range of vulnerable populations. Two reviewers graded the strength of evidence using established criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found a total of 62 eligible studies (58 trials and 4 observational studies) from our review of 3,979 abstracts. These studies included patients with diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, heart failure, myocardial infarction, asthma, depression, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, musculoskeletal diseases, and multiple chronic conditions. Fifty-seven trials of patient, provider, or systems interventions (KQ 1) evaluated 20 different types of interventions; 4 observational studies and one trial of policy interventions (KQ 2) evaluated the effect of reduced out-of-pocket expenses or improved prescription drug coverage. We found the most consistent evidence of improvement in medication adherence for interventions to reduce out-of-pocket expenses or improve prescription drug coverage, case management, and educational interventions across clinical conditions. Within clinical conditions, we found the strongest support for self-management of medications for short-term improvement in adherence for asthma patients; collaborative care or case management programs for short-term improvement of adherence and to improve symptoms for patients taking depression medications; and pharmacist-led approaches for hypertensive patients to improve systolic blood pressure.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Diverse interventions offer promising approaches to improving medication adherence for chronic conditions, particularly for the short term. Evidence on whether these approaches have broad applicability for clinical conditions and populations is limited, as is evidence regarding long-term medication adherence or health outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72991,"journal":{"name":"Evidence report/technology assessment","volume":" 208.4","pages":"1-685"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4780896/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence report/technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of patient, provider, and systems interventions (Key Question [KQ] 1) or policy interventions (KQ 2) in improving medication adherence for an array of chronic health conditions. For interventions that are effective in improving adherence, we then assessed their effectiveness in improving health, health care utilization, and adverse events.

Data sources: MEDLINE®, the Cochrane Library. Additional studies were identified from reference lists and technical experts.

Review methods: Two people independently selected, extracted data from, and rated the risk of bias of relevant trials and systematic reviews. We synthesized the evidence for effectiveness separately for each clinical condition, and within each condition, by type of intervention. We also evaluated the prevalence of intervention components across clinical conditions and the effectiveness of interventions for a range of vulnerable populations. Two reviewers graded the strength of evidence using established criteria.

Results: We found a total of 62 eligible studies (58 trials and 4 observational studies) from our review of 3,979 abstracts. These studies included patients with diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, heart failure, myocardial infarction, asthma, depression, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, musculoskeletal diseases, and multiple chronic conditions. Fifty-seven trials of patient, provider, or systems interventions (KQ 1) evaluated 20 different types of interventions; 4 observational studies and one trial of policy interventions (KQ 2) evaluated the effect of reduced out-of-pocket expenses or improved prescription drug coverage. We found the most consistent evidence of improvement in medication adherence for interventions to reduce out-of-pocket expenses or improve prescription drug coverage, case management, and educational interventions across clinical conditions. Within clinical conditions, we found the strongest support for self-management of medications for short-term improvement in adherence for asthma patients; collaborative care or case management programs for short-term improvement of adherence and to improve symptoms for patients taking depression medications; and pharmacist-led approaches for hypertensive patients to improve systolic blood pressure.

Conclusions: Diverse interventions offer promising approaches to improving medication adherence for chronic conditions, particularly for the short term. Evidence on whether these approaches have broad applicability for clinical conditions and populations is limited, as is evidence regarding long-term medication adherence or health outcomes.

缩小质量差距:重新审视科学现状(第4卷:药物依从性干预:比较有效性)。
目的:评估患者、提供者和系统干预(关键问题[KQ] 1)或政策干预(KQ 2)在改善一系列慢性健康状况的药物依从性方面的有效性。对于有效改善依从性的干预措施,我们随后评估了它们在改善健康、医疗保健利用和不良事件方面的有效性。数据来源:MEDLINE®,Cochrane图书馆。从参考清单和技术专家中确定了其他研究。评价方法:由两人独立选择、提取相关试验和系统评价的数据,并对其偏倚风险进行评定。我们根据干预类型,分别对每种临床情况和每种情况下的有效性证据进行综合。我们还评估了各种临床条件下干预成分的流行程度以及对一系列弱势群体的干预效果。两位审稿人使用既定标准对证据的强度进行评分。结果:我们从3979篇摘要中共发现62项符合条件的研究(58项试验和4项观察性研究)。这些研究包括患有糖尿病、高脂血症、高血压、心力衰竭、心肌梗死、哮喘、抑郁症、青光眼、多发性硬化症、肌肉骨骼疾病和多种慢性疾病的患者。57项患者、提供者或系统干预(kq1)试验评估了20种不同类型的干预;4项观察性研究和1项政策干预试验(kq2)评估了减少自付费用或提高处方药覆盖率的效果。我们发现了改善药物依从性的最一致的证据,这些干预措施可以减少自付费用或改善处方药覆盖范围、病例管理和跨临床条件的教育干预。在临床条件下,我们发现自我管理药物对哮喘患者依从性的短期改善是最有力的支持;短期改善依从性和改善服用抑郁症药物患者症状的协作护理或病例管理方案;以及药剂师主导的高血压患者改善收缩压的方法。结论:多种干预措施为改善慢性疾病的药物依从性提供了有希望的方法,特别是在短期内。关于这些方法是否广泛适用于临床条件和人群的证据有限,关于长期药物依从性或健康结果的证据也有限。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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