Using Handheld Devices to Promote Medication Adherence in Chronic Illness

Association Between Health Literacy, eHealth Literacy, and Health Outcomes Among Patients With Long-Term Conditions

Abstract. The objective of this paper is to synthesize and update findings from systematic review on health literacy and health outcomes among patients with long-term conditions, and extend the review to the digital domain. Health outcomes include clinical outcomes, processes of care, and health service use. Data sources are the following: (1) studies which appeared in two previous systematic reviews in 2004 and 2011 whose participants were people with long-term conditions or elderly ( n = 54); (2) articles on health literacy and health outcomes identified in an updated 2011–2016 search ( n = 26); (3) articles on eHealth literacy and its association with health outcomes ( n = 8). Strength of evidence was determined by a qualitative assessment of risk of bias, consistency, and directness. There was a lack of consistent evidence on the relationship between health literacy and clinical outcomes despite the consistent evidence on the association with mortality. There was low to insufficient evidence on the association between health literacy and self-rated health/function and emotional states of anxiety and depression, alongside high evidence on lack of association with quality of life. There was insufficient to low evidence on the association between health literacy and behavioral outcomes (medication adherence, other health behaviors) and finally also low to moderate evidence on the association between health literacy and use of health services such as hospitalization and emergency department. In the eHealth literacy domain, there were few studies reporting association with health behaviors and self-rated health with inconsistent results. In conclusion, it is advocated to examine performed heath literacy and eHealth literacy in large longitudinal studies.

Factors influencing oral adherence: qualitative metasummary and triangulation with quantitative evidence

BACKGROUND

Concern about adherence to oral agents among patients with cancer has grown as more oral agents are being used for cancer treatment. Knowledge of common factors that facilitate or inhibit adherence to oral medication regimens can be beneficial to clinicians in identifying patients at risk for nonadherence, in planning care to address barriers to adherence, and in educating patients about ways to improve adherence.

OBJECTIVES

The focus of this review is to synthesize the evidence about factors that influence adherence and identify implications for practice.

METHODS

Literature was searched via PubMed and CINAHL®. Evidence regarding factors influencing adherence was synthesized using a metasummary of qualitative research and triangulated with findings from quantitative research.

FINDINGS

Forty-four factors influencing adherence were identified from 159 research studies of patients with and without cancer. Factors associated with adherence in oncology and non-oncology cases included provider relations, side effects, forgetfulness, beliefs about medication necessity, establishing routines for taking medication, social support, ability to fit medications in lifestyle, cost, and medication knowledge. Among patients with cancer, depression and negative expectations of results also were shown to have a negative relationship to adherence.

The performance of mHealth in cancer supportive care: a research agenda

Background

Since the advent of smartphones, mHealth has risen to the attention of the health care system as something that could radically change the way health care has been viewed, managed, and delivered to date. This is particularly relevant for cancer, as one of the leading causes of death worldwide, and for cancer supportive care, since patients and caregivers have key roles in managing side effects. Given adequate knowledge, they are able to expect appropriate assessments and interventions. In this scenario, mHealth has great potential for linking patients, caregivers, and health care professionals; for enabling early detection and intervention; for lowering costs; and achieving better quality of life. Given its great potential, it is important to evaluate the performance of mHealth. This can be considered from several perspectives, of which organizational performance is particularly relevant, since mHealth may increase the productivity of health care providers and as a result even the productivity of health care systems.

Objective

This paper aims to review studies on the evaluation of the performance of mHealth, with particular focus on cancer care and cancer supportive care processes, concentrating on its contribution to organizational performance, as well as identifying some indications for a further research agenda.

Methods

We carried out a review of literature, aimed at identifying studies related to the performance of mHealth in general or focusing on cancer care and cancer supportive care.

Results

Our analysis revealed that studies are almost always based on a single dimension of performance. Any evaluations of the performance of mHealth are based on very different methods and measures, with a prevailing focus on issues linked to efficiency. This fails to consider the real contribution that mHealth can offer for improving the performance of health care providers, health care systems, and the quality of life in general.

Conclusions

Further research should start by stating and explaining what is meant by the evaluation of mHealth’s performance and then conduct more in-depth analysis in order to create shared frameworks to specifically identify the different dimensions of mHealth’s performance.

The role of mobile technologies in health care processes: the case of cancer supportive care

Background

Health care systems are gradually moving toward new models of care based on integrated care processes shared by different care givers and on an empowered role of the patient. Mobile technologies are assuming an emerging role in this scenario. This is particularly true in care processes where the patient has a particularly enhanced role, as is the case of cancer supportive care.

Objective

This paper aims to review existing studies on the actual role and use of mobile technology during the different stages of care processes, with particular reference to cancer supportive care.

Methods

We carried out a review of literature with the aim of identifying studies related to the use of mHealth in cancer care and cancer supportive care. The final sample size consists of 106 records.

Results

There is scant literature concerning the use of mHealth in cancer supportive care. Looking more generally at cancer care, we found that mHealth is mainly used for self-management activities carried out by patients. The main tools used are mobile devices like mobile phones and tablets, but remote monitoring devices also play an important role. Text messaging technologies (short message service, SMS) have a minor role, with the exception of middle income countries where text messaging plays a major role. Telehealth technologies are still rarely used in cancer care processes. If we look at the different stages of health care processes, we can see that mHealth is mainly used during the treatment of patients, especially for self-management activities. It is also used for prevention and diagnosis, although to a lesser extent, whereas it appears rarely used for decision-making and follow-up activities.

Conclusions

Since mHealth seems to be employed only for limited uses and during limited phases of the care process, it is unlikely that it can really contribute to the creation of new care models. This under-utilization may depend on many issues, including the need for it to be embedded into broader information systems. If the purpose of introducing mHealth is to promote the adoption of integrated care models, using mHealth should not be limited to some activities or to some phases of the health care process. Instead, there should be a higher degree of pervasiveness at all stages and in all health care delivery activities.

Randomized controlled feasibility trial of two telemedicine medication reminder systems for older adults with heart failure

We conducted a feasibility study of a telehealth intervention (an electronic pill box) and an m-health intervention (an app on a smartphone) for improving medication adherence in older adults with heart failure. A secondary aim was to compare patient acceptance of the devices. The participants were 60 adults with HF (65% male). Their average age was 69 years and 83% were Caucasian. Patients were randomized using a 2 × 2 design to one of four groups: pillbox silent, pillbox reminding, smartphone silent, smartphone reminding. We examined adherence to 4 medications over 28 days. The overall adherence rate was 78% (SD 35). People with the telehealth device adhered 80% of the time and people with the smartphone adhered 76% of the time. Those who received reminders adhered 79% of the time, and those with passive medication reminder devices adhered 78% of the time, i.e. reminding did not improve adherence. Patients preferred the m-health approach. Future interventions may need to address other contributors to poor adherence such as motivation.