Implementing medication adherence interventions in four Dutch living labs; context matters.

BACKGROUND: Despite the abundant availability of effective medication adherence interventions, uptake of these interventions into routine care often lacks. Examples of effective medication adherence interventions include telephone counseling, consult preparation and the teach-back method. Assessing context is an important step in understanding implementation success of interventions, but context is often not reported or only moderately described. This study aims to describe context-specific characteristics in four living labs prior to the implementation of evidence-based interventions aiming to improve medication adherence. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted within four living labs using individual interviews (n = 12) and focus groups (n = 4) with project leaders and involved healthcare providers. The four living labs are multidisciplinary collaboratives that are early adopters of medication adherence interventions in the Dutch primary care system. Context is defined as the environment or setting in which the proposed change is to be implemented. Interview topics to assess context were formulated based on the 'inner setting' and 'outer setting' domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were deductively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 39 community pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, general practitioners and a home care employee participated in the (focus group) interviews. All four living labs proved to be pharmacy-driven and characterized by a high regard for innovation by staff members, a positive implementation climate, high levels of leadership engagement and high compatibility between the living labs and the interventions. Two living labs were larger in size and characterized by more formal communication. Two living labs were characterized by higher levels of cosmopolitanism which resulted in more adaptable interventions. Worries about external policy, most notably lack of reimbursement for sustainment and upscaling of the interventions, were shared among all living labs. CONCLUSIONS: Contextual characteristics of four living labs that are early adopters of medication adherence interventions provide detailed examples of a positive implementation setting. These can be used to inform dissemination of medication adherence interventions in settings less experienced in implementing medication adherence interventions.

Association of conflicting information from healthcare providers and poor shared decision making with suboptimal adherence in direct oral anticoagulant treatment: A cross-sectional study in patients with atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVE: To assess direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) adherence and to determine possible determinants for suboptimal adherence in Dutch patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: Cross-sectional study of DOAC users who completed a self-reported questionnaire. Adherence was measured with Morisky8-item Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8). Logistic regression analysis was conducted to investigate determinants affecting adherence. RESULTS: 398 DOAC users completed the questionnaire (mean age 70.6 ± 9.2years). Approximately one in four patients had suboptimal adherence (MMAS-8 < 8). Multivariable analysis showed that patients who felt to have received conflicting information about the treatment, patients with higher educational level and patients who were not sufficiently involved in the treatment choice had a higher odds of suboptimal adherence. CONCLUSION: DOAC adherence was suboptimal. Conflicting information received from different healthcare providers (HCPs), lack of shared decision making and the patients' educational level were determinants negatively affecting DOAC adherence. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Efforts towards identifying suboptimally adherent DOAC patients are needed since they are at higher risk to develop thromboembolic events. Adherence counselling should be systematically and repeatedly encouraged and shared decision making should become more mainstream. Moreover, reinforced education of both patients and HCPs combined with interprofessional collaboration are potential solutions to prevent knowledge gaps and communication of conflicting information.

The Development and Proof of Principle Test of TRIAGE: A Practical Question Set to Identify and Discuss Medication-Related Problems in Community Pharmacy.

The pharmacy counter is a good place to identify and discuss medication-related problems. However, there is a lack of practical communication tools to support pharmacy technicians (PTs) in initiating a conversation with patients. This study aimed to develop and test a practical set of questions for PTs, called TRIAGE, to identify problems during encounters. TRIAGE was developed based on insight from the literature, focus groups with PTs and pharmacists, and input from patients and experts. In 10 community pharmacies, 17 PTs used TRIAGE during encounters with patients who collected their cardiovascular medication. For each encounter, PTs registered the identified problems and suggested solutions. A total of 105 TRIAGE conversations were held, 66 for first refill and 39 for follow-up refill prescriptions. In 15 (23%) first refill prescription encounters, a problem was identified. These problems concerned forgetting to take the medication, a complex medication regime or (fear of) side effects. In three (8%) follow-up refill prescription encounters, a problem was identified. Most of the problems were solved on the spot. Pharmacy technicians indicated that they identified medication-related problems with TRIAGE that otherwise would be left unnoticed. They appreciated TRIAGE as a useful instrument for starting the conversation with patients about medication use.

Beliefs about inhaled corticosteroids: Comparison of community pharmacists, pharmacy technicians and patients with asthma.

OBJECTIVES: To compare pharmacists' and pharmacy technicians' perceptions of patients' beliefs regarding inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with those of patients and to compare the ICS beliefs of pharmacists and technicians with those of patients with asthma. METHODS: 1269 community pharmacies were approached to fill out an online questionnaire; 1952 patients were sent a questionnaire by post. Beliefs (i.e., necessity and concerns) regarding ICS were measured using (an adapted version of) the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ-specific). Pharmacists and technicians were instructed to fill out the BMQ for themselves, and to fill it out in the way they thought most of their patients would complete it. RESULTS: 136 pharmacists, 90 pharmacy technicians and 161 patients with asthma completed the questionnaire. Pharmacists and technicians thought patients had more concerns about ICS than patients themselves reported (p < 0.0001). They also thought that patients had stronger beliefs in their personal need for ICS than patients reported (p < 0.01). Pharmacists reported lower levels of concerns than patients (p < 0.05) and both providers attributed a higher level of necessity to ICS than patients did (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Pharmacists and technicians overestimate the personal need for treatment as well as the concerns patients with asthma have regarding ICS. They also have, to some extent, stronger positive beliefs about ICS than patients. If pharmacists and technicians expect that patients share their positive views about ICS, they might be less likely to elicit and address patients' doubts and concerns about ICS, which might be relevant for effective ICS treatment and subsequent patient outcomes.

Perceived need to take medication is associated with medication non-adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: This is the first cross-sectional study that aims to examine associations between beliefs about medication and non-adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, taking potential psychological confounders into account. METHODS: Eligible patients (diagnosed with RA for ≥1 year or ≥18 years, using greater than or equal to one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug) were included by their rheumatologist during regular outpatient visits between September 2009 and September 2010. Included patients received questionnaires. The Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire was used to measure the perceived need to take medication (necessity beliefs), the concerns about taking medication (concern beliefs), general medication beliefs, and attitudes toward taking medication. Medication non-adherence (no/yes) was measured using the Compliance Questionnaire Rheumatology (CQR). Associations between beliefs and non-adherence, and the influence of demographical, clinical, and psychological factors (symptoms of anxiety/depression, illness cognitions, self-efficacy) were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 580 of the 820 eligible patients willing to participate were included in the analyses (68% female, mean age 63 years, 30% non-adherent to their medication). Weaker necessity beliefs (OR [odds ratio]: 0.8, 95% CI [confidence interval]: 0.8-0.9) and an unfavorable balance between necessity and concern beliefs (OR: 0.9, 95% CI: 0.9-1.0) were associated with CQR non-adherence. Also, having an indifferent attitude toward medication (no/yes) was associated with CQR non-adherence (OR: 5.3, 95% CI: 1.1-25.8), but the prevalence of patients with an indifferent attitude toward medication was low. The associations were barely confounded by demographical, clinical, and psychological factors. CONCLUSION: Increasing necessity beliefs about medication in clinical practice might be worthwhile in improving medication adherence in RA patients.

Psychosocial predictors of non-adherence to chronic medication: systematic review of longitudinal studies.

OBJECTIVES: Several cross-sectional studies suggest that psychosocial factors are associated with non-adherence to chronic preventive maintenance medication (CPMM); however, results from longitudinal associations have not yet been systematically summarized. Therefore, the objective of this study was to systematically synthesize evidence of longitudinal associations between psychosocial predictors and CPMM non-adherence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsychINFO databases were searched for studies meeting our inclusion criteria. The reference lists and the ISI Web of Knowledge of the included studies were checked. Studies were included if they had an English abstract, involved adult populations using CPMM living in Western countries, and if they investigated associations between psychosocial predictors and medication non-adherence using longitudinal designs. Data were extracted according to a literature-based extraction form. Study quality was independently judged by two researchers using a framework comprising six bias domains. Studies were considered to be of high quality if ≥four domains were free of bias. Psychosocial predictors for non-adherence were categorized into five pre-defined categories: beliefs/cognitions; coping styles; social influences and social support; personality traits; and psychosocial well-being. A qualitative best evidence synthesis was performed to synthesize evidence of longitudinal associations between psychosocial predictors and CPMM non-adherence. RESULTS: Of 4,732 initially-identified studies, 30 (low-quality) studies were included in the systematic review. The qualitative best evidence synthesis demonstrated limited evidence for absence of a longitudinal association between CPMM non-adherence and the psychosocial categories. The strength of evidence for the review's findings is limited by the low quality of included studies. CONCLUSION: The results do not provide psychosocial targets for the development of new interventions in clinical practice. This review clearly demonstrates the need for high-quality, longitudinal research to identify psychosocial predictors of medication non-adherence.

Effectiveness of a group-based intervention to change medication beliefs and improve medication adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a group-based intervention on the balance between necessity beliefs and concern beliefs about medication and on medication non-adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Non-adherent RA patients using disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were randomized to an intervention or control arm. The intervention consisted, amongst others, of two motivational interviewing-guided group sessions led by the same pharmacist. Control patients received brochures about their DMARDs. Questionnaires were completed up to 12 months follow-up. RESULTS: 123 patients (mean age: 60 years, female: 69%) were randomized. No differences in necessity beliefs and concern beliefs about medication and in medication non-adherence were detected between the intervention and control arm, except at 12 months' follow-up: participants in the intervention arm had less strong necessity beliefs about medication than participants in the control arm (b: -1.0 (95% CI: -2.0, -0.1)). CONCLUSION: This trial did not demonstrate superiority of our intervention over the control arm in changing beliefs about medication or in improving medication adherence over time. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Absent intervention effects might have been due to, amongst others, selection bias and a suboptimal treatment integrity level. Hence, targeting beliefs about medication in clinical practice should not yet be ruled out.

Development and content of a group-based intervention to improve medication adherence in non-adherent patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the systematic development and content of a short intervention to improve medication adherence to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in non-adherent patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: The intervention mapping (IM) framework was used to develop the intervention. The following IM steps were conducted: (1) a needs assessment; (2) formulation of specific intervention objectives; (3) inventory of methods and techniques needed to design the intervention and (4) production and piloting of the intervention. RESULTS: The intervention (consisting of two group sessions led by a pharmacist, a homework assignment, and a follow-up call) aims to improve the balance between necessity and concern beliefs about medication, and to resolve practical barriers in medication taking. The central communication method used is motivational interviewing. CONCLUSION: By applying the IM framework, we were able to create a feasible, time-efficient and promising intervention to improve medication adherence in non-adherent RA patients. Intervention effects are currently being assessed in a randomized controlled trial. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This paper could serve as a guideline for other health care professionals when developing similar interventions. If the RCT demonstrates sufficient effectiveness of this intervention in reducing medication non-adherence in RA patients, the intervention could be embedded in clinical practice.

Medication adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a critical appraisal of the existing literature.

Adherence to medication in patients with rheumatoid arthritis is low, varying from 30 to 80%. Improving adherence to therapy could therefore dramatically improve the efficacy of drug therapy. Although indicators for suboptimal adherence can be useful to identify nonadherent patients, and could function as targets for adherence-improving interventions, no indicators are yet found to be consistently and strongly related to nonadherence. Despite this, nonadherence behavior could conceptually be categorized into two subtypes: unintentional (due to forgetfulness, regimen complexity or physical problems) and intentional (based on the patient's decision to take no/less medication). In case of intentional nonadherence, patients seem to make a benefit-risk analysis weighing the perceived risks of the treatment against the perceived benefits. This weighing process may be influenced by the patient's beliefs about medication, the patient's self-efficacy and the patient's knowledge of the disease. This implicates that besides tackling practical barriers, clinicians should be sensitive to patient's personal beliefs that may impact medication adherence.