ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Suboptimal medication adherence is a significant problem for patients with serious mental illness. Measuring medication adherence through subjective and objective measures can be challenging, time-consuming, and inaccurate. OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this feasibility and acceptability study was to evaluate the impact of a digital medicine system (DMS) among Veterans (patients) with serious mental illness as compared with treatment as usual (TAU) on medication adherence. METHODS: This open-label, 2-site, provider-randomized trial assessed aripiprazole refill adherence in Veterans with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder. We randomized 26 providers such that their patients either received TAU or DMS for a period of 90 days. Semistructured interviews with patients and providers were used to examine the feasibility and acceptability of using the DMS. RESULTS: We enrolled 46 patients across 2 Veterans Health Administration sites: 21 (46%) in DMS and 25 (54%) in TAU. There was no difference in the proportion of days covered by medication refill over 3 and 6 months (0.82, SD 0.24 and 0.75, SD 0.26 in DMS vs 0.86, SD 0.19 and 0.82, SD 0.21 in TAU, respectively). The DMS arm had 0.85 (SD 0.20) proportion of days covered during the period they were engaged with the DMS (mean 144, SD 100 days). Interviews with patients (n=14) and providers (n=5) elicited themes salient to using the DMS. Patient findings described the positive impact of the DMS on medication adherence, challenges with the DMS patch connectivity and skin irritation, and challenges with the DMS app that affected overall use. Providers described an overall interest in using a DMS as an objective measure to support medication adherence in their patients. However, providers described challenges with the DMS dashboard and integrating DMS data into their workflow, which decreased the usability of the DMS for providers. CONCLUSIONS: There was no observed difference in refill rates. Among those who engaged in the DMS arm, the proportion of days covered by refills were relatively high (mean 0.85, SD 0.20). The qualitative analyses highlighted areas for further refinement of the DMS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03881449; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03881449.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) may enhance attention and working memory. The neuromodulator effects of VNS are thought to activate the release of neurotransmitters involving cognition and to promote neuronal plasticity. Therefore, VNS has been studied for its effects on attention and working memory impairment in neuropsychiatric disorders. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the effects of VNS on attention and working memory among patients with neuropsychiatric disorders, examine stimulation parameters, provide mechanistic hypotheses, and propose future studies using VNS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using electronic databases MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane library, and PsycINFO (Ovid). Narrative analysis was used to describe the therapeutic effects of VNS on attention and working memory, describe stimulation parameters, and propose explanatory mechanisms. RESULTS: We identified 20 studies reporting VNS effects on attention and working memory in patients with epilepsy or mood disorders. For epilepsy, there was one randomized controlled trial from all 18 studies. It demonstrated no statistically significant differences in the cognitive tasks between active and control VNS. From a within-subject experimental design, significant improvement of working memory after VNS was demonstrated. One of three nonrandomized controlled trials found significantly improved attentional performance after VNS. The cohort studies compared VNS and surgery and found attentional improvement in both groups. Nine of 12 pretest-posttest studies showed improvement of attention or working memory after VNS. For mood disorders, although one study showed significant improvement of attention following VNS, the other did not. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that, although we identified some positive results from eligible studies, there is insufficient good-quality evidence to establish VNS as an effective intervention to enhance attention and working memory in persons with neuropsychiatric disorders. Further studies assessing the efficacy of such intervention are needed.
