Financial incentives for improving adherence to maintenance treatment in patients with psychotic disorders (Money for Medication): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial

Women and health professionals' perspectives on a conditional cash transfer programme to improve pregnancy follow-up: a qualitative analysis of the NAITRE randomised controlled study

OBJECTIVES

Women of low socioeconomic status have been described as having suboptimal prenatal care, which in turn has been associated with poor pregnancy outcomes. Many types of conditional cash transfer (CCT) programmes have been developed, including programmes to improve prenatal care or smoking cessation during pregnancy, and their effects demonstrated. However, ethical critiques have included paternalism and lack of informed choice. Our objective was to determine if women and healthcare professionals (HPs) shared these concerns.

DESIGN

Prospective qualitative research.

SETTING

We included economically disadvantaged women, as defined by health insurance data, who participated in the French NAITRE randomised trial assessing a CCT programme during prenatal follow-up to improve pregnancy outcomes. The HP worked in some maternities participating in this trial.

PARTICIPANTS

26 women, 14 who received CCT and 12 who did not, mostly unemployed (20/26), and - 7 HPs.

INTERVENTIONS

We conducted a multicentre cross-sectional qualitative study among women and HPs who participated in the NAITRE Study to assess their views on CCT. The women were interviewed after childbirth.

RESULTS

Women did not perceive CCT negatively. They did not mention feeling stigmatised. They described CCT as a significant source of aid for women with limited financial resources. HP described the CCT in less positive terms, for example, expressing concern about discussing cash transfer at their first medical consultation with women. Though they emphasised ethical concerns about the basis of the trial, they recognised the importance of evaluating CCT.

CONCLUSIONS

In France, a high-income country where prenatal follow-up is free, HPs were concerned that the CCT programme would change their relationship with patients and wondered if it was the best use of funding. However, women who received a cash incentive said they did not feel stigmatised and indicated that these payments helped them prepare for their baby's birth.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02402855.

Long-acting antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: opportunities and challenges

INTRODUCTION

Maintenance antipsychotic treatment improves multiple outcomes in people with schizophrenia. These benefits are challenged by medication nonadherence, which is a common occurrence. Long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI) formulations were developed to reduce nonadherence and thereby improve outcomes. This narrative review is based on a PubMed search (January 2000 - August 2022) for studies on LAI antipsychotics.

AREAS COVERED

Opportunities and challenges associated with LAIs are reviewed. Advantages, compared to oral antipsychotics (OAs), include improved adherence, reduced relapse and hospitalization risk, delayed and lower relapse risk after stopping treatment, and the ability to differentiate true treatment resistance from 'pseudo'-resistance. Additionally, LAIs are associated with lower all-cause mortality than OAs. LAIs are under-used in many services, partly reflecting negative attitudes, misconceptions, and lack of knowledge among clinicians, patients, and carers. Practical barriers to LAI use include acquisition costs and inadequate service structures to administer/monitor LAI treatment.

EXPERT OPINION

The education and engagement of clinicians, patients and caregivers can assist more informed decision-making regarding LAIs. Future research regarding LAIs should encompass multiple complementary designs, focus on functionality and recovery outcomes, and include groups at high risk of relapse, including those with comorbid substance use disorders and early in the course of schizophrenia.

A Digital Intervention Using Daily Financial Incentives to Increase Medication Adherence in Severe Mental Illness: Single-Arm Longitudinal Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Medication nonadherence is prevalent in severe mental illness and is associated with multiple negative outcomes. Mobile technology and financial incentives show promise to improve medication adherence; however, studies in mental health, especially with oral medications, are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of offering financial incentives through a mobile app based on behavioral economics principles to improve medication adherence in severe mental illness.

METHODS

A 10-week, single-arm longitudinal pilot study was conducted. Patients earned rewards in the context of app-based adherence incentives. The reward was split into biweekly payments made in increments of US $15, minus any US $2 per day penalties for missed check-ins. Time-varying effect modeling was used to summarize the patients' response during the study.

RESULTS

A total of 25 patients were enrolled in this pilot study, of which 72% (n=18) were female, and 48% (n=12) were of a White racial background. Median age was 24 (Q1-Q3: 20.5-30) years. Participants were more frequently diagnosed with schizophrenia and related disorders (n=9, 36%), followed by major depressive disorder (n=8, 32%). App engagement and medication adherence in the first 2 weeks were higher than in the last 8 weeks of the study. At study endpoint, app engagement remained high (n=24, Z=-3.17; P<.001), but medication adherence was not different from baseline (n=24, Z=-0.59; P=.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Financial incentives were effectively delivered using an app and led to high engagement throughout the study and a significantly increased medication adherence for 2 weeks. Leveraging behavioral economics and mobile health technology can increase medication adherence in the short term.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04191876; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04191876.

Can incentives improve antipsychotic adherence in major mental illness? A mixed-methods systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Incentives have been effectively used in several healthcare contexts. This systematic review aimed to ascertain whether incentives can improve antipsychotic adherence, what ethical and practical issues arise and whether existing evidence resolves these issues.

DESIGN

Systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO. Searches on 13 January 2021 (no start date) found papers on incentives for antipsychotics. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, qualitative research and ethical analyses were included. Papers measuring impact on adherence were synthesised, then a typology of ethical and policy issues was compiled, finally the empirical literature was compared with this typology to describe current evidence and identify remaining research questions.

RESULTS

26 papers were included. 2 RCTs used contingent financial incentives for long-acting injectable antipsychotic preparations. Over 12 months, there were significantly larger increases in adherence among the intervention groups versus control groups in both RCTs. There were no consistently positive secondary outcomes. 39 ethical and practical issues were identified. 12 of these are amenable to empirical study but have not been researched and for 7 the current evidence is mixed.

CONCLUSIONS

In keeping with other areas of healthcare, antipsychotic adherence can be increased with financial incentives. Payments of 2.5 times minimum wage changed behaviour. The typology of issues reported in this systematic review provides a template for future policy and ethical analysis. The persistence of the effect and the impact of incentives on intrinsic motivation require further research.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020222702.

Increasing the Impact of Interventions Incentivizing Psychiatric Treatment Engagement: Challenges and Opportunities

Individuals with psychiatric disorders often struggle to initiate and engage in treatment. Financial incentives improve treatment engagement, including treatment attendance, medication adherence, and abstinence from substance use. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) recently made the first large-scale, successful effort to implement incentive-based interventions in substance use disorder treatment. Health care systems, including the VA, can increase the impact of these interventions by extending them to target a range of psychiatric disorders, adapting them for specific clinical contexts, using insights from behavioral economics, and partnering with corporations to fund incentives and implement interventions.

The Use of Gamification and Incentives in Mobile Health Apps to Improve Medication Adherence: Scoping Review

Background

Emerging health care strategies addressing medication adherence include the use of direct-to-patient incentives or elements adapted from computer games. However, there is currently no published evidence synthesis on the use of gamification or financial incentives in mobile apps to improve medication adherence.

Objective

The aim of this scoping review is to synthesize and appraise the literature pertaining to the use of mobile apps containing gamification or financial incentives for medication adherence. There were two objectives: to explore the reported effectiveness of these features and to describe and appraise the design and development process, including patient involvement.

Methods

The following databases were searched for relevant articles published in English from database inception to September 24, 2020: Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. The framework by Arksey and O’Malley and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist guided this scoping review. Using a systematic screening process, studies were included if incentives or game features were used within mobile apps to specifically address medication adherence. An appraisal using risk of bias tools was also applied to their respective study design.

Results

A total of 11 studies from the initial 691 retrieved articles were included in this review. Across the studies, gamification alone (9/11, 82%) was used more than financial incentives (1/11, 9%) alone or a combination of the two (1/11, 9%). The studies generally reported improved or sustained optimal medication adherence outcomes; however, there was significant heterogeneity in the patient population, methodology such as outcome measures, and reporting of these studies. There was considerable variability in the development process and evaluation of the apps, with authors opting for either the waterfall or agile methodology. App development was often guided by a theory, but across the reviewed studies, there were no common theories used. Patient involvement was not commonly evident in predevelopment phases but were generally reserved for evaluations of feasibility, acceptance, and effectiveness. Patient perspectives on gamified app features indicated a potential to motivate positive health behaviors such as medication adherence along with critical themes of repetitiveness and irrelevance of certain features. The appraisal indicated a low risk of bias in most studies, although concerns were identified in potential confounding.

Conclusions

To effectively address medication adherence via gamified and incentivized mobile apps, an evidence-based co-design approach and agile methodology should be used. This review indicates some adoption of an agile approach in app development; however, patient involvement is lacking in earlier stages. Further research in a generalized cohort of patients living with chronic conditions would facilitate the identification of barriers, potential opportunities, and the justification for the use of gamification and financial incentives in mobile apps for medication adherence.

Medication Gaps and Antipsychotic Polypharmacy in Previously Hospitalized Schizophrenia Patients: An Electronic Cohort Study in Three Canadian Provinces

BACKGROUND

Real world evidence about antipsychotics focuses on rehospitalization. Modeling the time course of pharmacotherapy would show patients' adherence to medications and physicians' adherence to medication guidelines. We aimed to calculate the cumulative time spent in second generation antipsychotics (SGAs), gaps, antipsychotic polypharmacy, and clozapine in discharged schizophrenia patients.

METHODS

Hospitalization and pharmacy dispensing data from 2008-2018 in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia were linked and an electronic cohort (N = 2,997) was created (mean follow-up: 49 months, SD = 38). Cohort members were required to have a minimum of 6 weeks medicated with aripiprazole, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone.

RESULTS

The multistate model predicted that schizophrenia patients accumulated 44 months in SGA monotherapy, 4 months in polypharmacy, 11 months in medication gaps and 17 days in clozapine over a 5-year period. The majority of transitions were between SGA and medication gap. Accumulated time in medication gaps was seven times as much as in clozapine. Each 10% delay in SGA initiation post-discharge was associated with a 2, 1, and 6% higher risk for polypharmacy (95% CI: 1.01-1.02), gap (95% CI: 1.01-1.01), and clozapine (95% CI: 1.04-1.08), respectively.

INTERPRETATION

Schizophrenia patients accumulated more time unmedicated and in polypharmacy compared to clozapine. Either treatment guidelines for schizophrenia are not followed, or real-world challenges hamper their implementation.

Controversies Surrounding the Use of Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Medications for the Treatment of Patients with Schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is a serious mental illness that requires continuous and effective long-term management to reduce symptoms, improve quality of life, and prevent relapse. Oral antipsychotic medications have proven efficacy for many patients taking these medications; however, a considerable number of patients continue to experience ongoing symptoms and relapse, often due to lack of adherence. The advent of long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations of antipsychotic medications provided an opportunity to improve treatment adherence and overall patient outcomes. Despite data to support LAI efficacy, safety, and improved adherence over oral formulations, there are several misconceptions about and barriers to LAI implementation within a standard of care for patients with schizophrenia. Areas of resistance around LAIs include (1) doubts regarding their benefits outside of improved adherence, (2) questions regarding their prescribing to a broader population of patients with schizophrenia, (3) when to initiate LAIs, (4) concerns regarding the safety of LAIs in comparison with oral medication, and (5) the most effective ways to educate healthcare providers, patients, and caretakers to enable appropriate LAI consideration and acceptance. Here, we discuss these key controversies associated with LAIs and provide supportive evidence to facilitate LAI use in a manner that is constructive to the clinician-patient relationship and successful treatment.

Medication Adherence and Influencing Factors Among Patients With Severe Mental Disorders in Low-Income Families During COVID-19 Outbreak

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 has spread across the globe in a short time and affected people's life, especially patients with severe mental disorders. Poor adherence to antipsychotics was usually associated with an increasing risk of relapse. This study investigated medication adherence status among patients with severe mental disorders in low-income families during COVID-19 outbreak and the influencing factors.

METHODS

To select patients with severe mental disorders in low-income families in central China's Henan Province, we used multi-stage stratified random sampling method. Trained interviewers and psychiatrists collected questionnaire responses from the patients through face-to-face interviews or video interviews. Logistic regression models were used to examine factors that influence the status of medication adherence.

RESULTS

A total of 24,763 valid questionnaires were collected between March 10, 2020, and March 31, 2020. The regular medication rate of patients with severe mental disorders in low-income families during the COVID-19 outbreak was 51.46%. Twelve factors were found to influence medication adherence of investigated individuals. Positive factors for regular medication were younger age, higher education level of patients and their guardians, higher medical expenditure, higher level of self-care ability, having subsidies for care and supervision, having disability certificate and personal care, etc.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 outbreak affected the medication adherence among patients with severe mental disorders in low-income families. The influencing factors are complicated and diverse, including psychological effects, traffic impact, and economy, etc. The government should pay more efforts on social assistance programs and flexibly deal with difficulties during public health emergencies like the COVID-19.

Adherence and the Moral Construction of the Self: A Narrative Analysis of Anticoagulant Medication

In this article, we examine illness narratives to illuminate the discursive work that patients undertake to construct themselves as "good" and adherent. Biographical narrative interviews were undertaken with 17 patients receiving anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, from five English hospitals (May 2016-June 2017). Through pluralistic narrative analysis, we highlight the discursive tensions narrators face when sharing accounts of their medicine-taking. They undertake challenging linguistic and performative work to reconcile apparently paradoxical positions. We show how the adherent patient is co-constructed through dialogue at the intersection of discourses including authority of doctors, personal responsibility for health, scarcity of resources, and deservingness. We conclude that the notion of medication adherence places a hidden moral and discursive burden of treatment on patients which they must negotiate when invited into conversations about their medications. This discursive work reveals, constitutes, and upholds medicine-taking as a profoundly moral practice.

Interventions to improve medication adherence in mental health: the update of a systematic review of cost-effectiveness

OBJECTIVE

Medication non-adherence in mental health problems has social and economic costs. The objective of the study was to review the cost-effectiveness of interventions to enhance medication adherence in patients with mental health problems.

METHODS

The update of a previous systematic review was performed. Databases were searched in June 2019: MEDLINE, PSYCINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, CRD, WOS. Cost-effectiveness studies comparing an intervention to improve the medication adherence with other interventions/usual care in adults with mental health problems were included. Data were extracted, methodological quality of the studies was assessed and a narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included in the review. The interventions that showed medication adherence increase were: a financial incentive when depot injection was taken by patients with psychotic disorders, a value-based benefit design policy including copayment and counselling in a company setting, and a medication treatment decision supported by a pharmacogenetic test. The other studies (coaching by pharmacists; a psychological and educational intervention at health care centres) did not find differences between groups. No study found cost differences between alternatives.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to improve medication adherence in adults with mental health problems could be cost-effective, especially those based on financial incentives, although more research is needed. KEYPOINTS There are several types of interventions designed to enhance medication adherence in patients with mental health problems. Few of them have demonstrated cost-effectiveness. Two studies found that a financial incentive per depot injection in patients with psychotic disorders improved the medication adherence. Two other studies found improvement in adherence due to two specific interventions: a value-based benefit design policy in a company setting and a pharmacogenetic test supporting the medication treatment decision. No study found differences in costs between the intervention and the comparator. More research is needed to implement cost-effective interventions.

Antipsychotic Treatment Failure: A Systematic Review on Risk Factors and Interventions for Treatment Adherence in Psychosis

Objective: Antipsychotic medication non-adherence has detrimental effects on patients' clinical outcome. It is unclear which risk factors affect adherence most and which interventions are effective at improving adherence to antipsychotic medication. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize evidence exploring risk factors of non-adherence to antipsychotic treatment and effectiveness of intervention to improve adherence in patients with psychotic spectrum disorders.

Methods: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed from 1994 to 2019 using a structured search strategy. Studies were quality assessed, and studies reporting on possible risk factors and intervention strategies were synthesized.

Results: We reviewed 26 studies on factors related to antipsychotic medication adherence and 17 studies on interventions to improve adherence in patients with psychosis spectrum disorders. Risk factors of non-adherence included younger age, poor illness insight, cannabis abuse, and the presence of severe positive symptoms. Antipsychotic medication adherence was associated with positive attitude toward medication of both patients and their family, family involvement, and illness insight. Somewhat consistent evidence was found for interventions involving family and technology-based interventions and strategies combining depot medication with psychoeducation. However, given the wide range of heterogeneous interventions and methodological limitations, findings must be interpreted with caution.

Conclusion: Despite much effort invested in the research area of antipsychotic medication adherence, the heterogeneity in study design and outcome, adding to confounding effects and possible biases, and methodological restraints complicate comparability of the results. Future research in this field should therefore be conducted on patient-tailored interventions, considering risk factors affecting the patient and implementing well-validated, standardized assessment methods. Accordingly, this systematic review seeks to facilitate endeavors improving adherence to antipsychotic treatment by identifying modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors, outlining effective intervention strategies, and proposing recommendations to enhance adherence strategies.

Psychosocial interventions for people with both severe mental illness and substance misuse

BACKGROUND

Even low levels of substance misuse by people with a severe mental illness can have detrimental effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions for reduction in substance use in people with a serious mental illness compared with standard care.

SEARCH METHODS

The Information Specialist of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group (CSG) searched the CSG Trials Register (2 May 2018), which is based on regular searches of major medical and scientific databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychosocial interventions for substance misuse with standard care in people with serious mental illness.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated standard estimates of risk ratio (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) between groups. Where meta-analyses were possible, we pooled data using a random-effects model. Using the GRADE approach, we identified seven patient-centred outcomes and assessed the quality of evidence for these within each comparison.

MAIN RESULTS

Our review now includes 41 trials with a total of 4024 participants. We have identified nine comparisons within the included trials and present a summary of our main findings for seven of these below. We were unable to summarise many findings due to skewed data or because trials did not measure the outcome of interest. In general, evidence was rated as low- or very-low quality due to high or unclear risks of bias because of poor trial methods, or inadequately reported methods, and imprecision due to small sample sizes, low event rates and wide confidence intervals. 1. Integrated models of care versus standard care (36 months) No clear differences were found between treatment groups for loss to treatment (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.45; participants = 603; studies = 3; low-quality evidence), death (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.57; participants = 421; studies = 2; low-quality evidence), alcohol use (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.56; participants = 143; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), substance use (drug) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.25; participants = 85; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), global assessment of functioning (GAF) scores (MD 0.40, 95% CI -2.47 to 3.27; participants = 170; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), or general life satisfaction (QOLI) scores (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.38; participants = 373; studies = 2; moderate-quality evidence). 2. Non-integrated models of care versus standard care There was no clear difference between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at 12 months (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.99; participants = 134; studies = 3; very low-quality evidence). 3. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) versus standard care There was no clear difference between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at three months (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.86; participants = 152; studies = 2; low-quality evidence), cannabis use at six months (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.15; participants = 47; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) or mental state insight (IS) scores by three months (MD 0.52, 95% CI -0.78 to 1.82; participants = 105; studies = 1; low-quality evidence). 4. Contingency management versus standard care We found no clear differences between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at three months (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.11; participants = 255; studies = 2; moderate-quality evidence), number of stimulant positive urine tests at six months (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.06; participants = 176; studies = 1) or hospitalisations (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.93; participants = 176; studies = 1); both low-quality evidence. 5. Motivational interviewing (MI) versus standard care We found no clear differences between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment at six months (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.63 to 4.64; participants = 62; studies = 1). A clear difference, favouring MI, was observed for abstaining from alcohol (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.75; participants = 28; studies = 1) but not other substances (MD -0.07, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.42; participants = 89; studies = 1), and no differences were observed in mental state general severity (SCL-90-R) scores (MD -0.19, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.21; participants = 30; studies = 1). All very low-quality evidence. 6. Skills training versus standard care At 12 months, there were no clear differences between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.20 to 10.10; participants = 122; studies = 3) or death (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.42; participants = 121; studies = 1). Very low-quality, and low-quality evidence, respectively. 7. CBT + MI versus standard care At 12 months, there was no clear difference between treatment groups for numbers lost to treatment (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.59; participants = 327; studies = 1; low-quality evidence), number of deaths (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.76; participants = 603; studies = 4; low-quality evidence), relapse (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.04; participants = 36; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence), or GAF scores (MD 1.24, 95% CI -1.86 to 4.34; participants = 445; studies = 4; very low-quality evidence). There was also no clear difference in reduction of drug use by six months (MD 0.19, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.60; participants = 119; studies = 1; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We included 41 RCTs but were unable to use much data for analyses. There is currently no high-quality evidence to support any one psychosocial treatment over standard care for important outcomes such as remaining in treatment, reduction in substance use or improving mental or global state in people with serious mental illnesses and substance misuse. Furthermore, methodological difficulties exist which hinder pooling and interpreting results. Further high-quality trials are required which address these concerns and improve the evidence in this important area.

Use of Behavioral Economics to Improve Medication Adherence in Severe Mental Illness

Medication nonadherence is associated with multiple negative outcomes. Financial reinforcement based on behavioral economic principles has been proposed as a potential strategy to enhance medication adherence in severe mental illness, and some studies show that small incentives significantly increase adherence to long-acting injectable treatment. After the intervention is stopped, however, adherence appears to decline. Because of the limited number of studies published so far, results should be interpreted with caution. When implementing this strategy, measures must be taken to address ethical concerns. Larger, naturalistic studies focusing on the effects of financial incentives for different treatment formulations are needed to further evaluate this adherence-enhancing strategy.

The association of financial incentives for low density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction with patient activation and motivation

There is growing interest in using financial incentives for patients to improve medication adherence, but few studies have evaluated whether financial incentives are associated with patients' activation and motivation. We analyzed survey data collected as part of a randomized clinical trial conducted from 2011 to 2014 of four financial incentive interventions to reduce low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) among patients at risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The main trial included 1503 patients aged 18–80 and recruited from primary care practices affiliated with three health systems. Participants were randomized into four groups: patient financial incentives, primary care physicians (PCPs) incentives, patients and PCPs shared incentives, or no incentives for LDL-C control. Patient Activation Measure (PAM) and Treatment Self Regulation Questionnaire (TSRQ) surveys were administered at baseline and 12 months. Clinical outcomes were change in LDL-C at 12 and 15 months and average medication adherence as measured by electronic pill bottle opening. Mean changes in PAM and TSRQ scores were compared between patients eligible and not eligible for incentives. Clinical outcomes were tested against baseline and change in psychosocial measures using bivariate and multivariate regression. Change in PAM score and TSRQ autonomous subscore did not differ significantly between patients eligible and not eligible for incentives. Lower baseline and greater increase in TSRQ autonomous subscore were predictive of greater 15-month decrease in LDL-C. A financial incentive intervention to improve LDL-C control was not associated with changes in patients' activation or autonomous motivation. Increases in patient autonomous motivation are predictive of long-term LDL-C control.

•

Financial incentives for lipid control were not associated with changes in activation or motivation.

•

Participants had high activation and motivation levels at baseline.

•

Increases in autonomous motivation were associated with better lipid control at 15 months.

Adherence to long-term prophylactic treatment: microeconomic analysis of patients' behavior and the impact of financial incentives

The effectiveness of medical therapies depends crucially on patients' adherence. To gain deeper insight into the behavioral mechanisms underlying adherence, we present a microeconomic model of the decision-making process of an individual who is initially in an asymptomatic clinical state and to whom a prophylactic therapy is offered with the aim of preventing damage to health in the future. The focus of modeling is the optimization of an intertemporal utility function, where time-inconsistent preferences are incorporated by a quasi-hyperbolic discount function. The predictions of the model concur with experience in clinical practice. Moreover, the introduction of time-inconsistency reveals a self-control problem of the individuals where resolutions made before may be given up at a later time. A more pronounced present bias leads to a decrease in adherence and, consequently, the gain in societal welfare resulting from the prophylactic therapy declines. Developing effective strategies to improve adherence is a major challenge in health care. As an example, the impact of financial incentives offered to the patients on adherence and welfare are investigated on the basis of the model. The results are consistent with empirical findings. The approach presented contributes to a better understanding of the complex interaction of the relevant determinants for adherence, particularly regarding the individuals' self-control problem.

Effectiveness of financial incentives for long-acting injectable antipsychotic adherence in patients with psychotic and bipolar disorders: a systematic review protocol

REVIEW QUESTION

The question of this review is: what is the effectiveness of financial compensation for receiving a dose of long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication on the rate of medication adherence in adult patients with psychotic and bipolar disorders in an outpatient/community setting?

Medical and social costs after using financial incentives to improve medication adherence: results of a 1 year randomised controlled trial

Objective

Offering a financial incentive (‘Money for Medication’) is effective in improving adherence to treatment with depot antipsychotic medications. We investigated the cost-effectiveness in terms of medical costs and judicial expenses of using financial incentives to improve adherence. The effects of financial incentives on depot medication adherence were evaluated in a randomised controlled trial. Patients in the intervention group received €30 a month over 12 months if antipsychotic depot medication was accepted. The control group received mental health care as usual. For 133 patients outcomes were calculated based on self-reported service use and delinquent behaviour and expressed as standard unit costs to value resource use.

Results

The financial incentive resulted in higher average costs related to mental health care (€449.6 versus €355.7). and lower medical costs related to other healthcare services (€52.0 versus €78.4). Relevant differences in social costs related to delinquent behaviour were not found. Although wide confidence intervals indicate uncertainty, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio’s (ICER) indicate that it costs €2080 for achieving a 20% increase in adherence or €3332 for achieving over 80% adherence. In sum, offering money as financial incentive for increasing compliance did not lead to an overall cost reduction as compared to care as usual.

Trial registration NTR2350, 01 June 2010

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13104-018-3747-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A perspective on nonadherence to drug therapy: psychological barriers and strategies to overcome nonadherence

Medication adherence represents an inefficiency and ongoing challenge within medical care. The problem has been long-recognized - indeed, the research literature contains thousands of articles on the topic. Nonetheless, because of the complex nature of the problem, it still cannot be considered to be solved. Reasons for nonadherence are myriad but psychological barriers to adherence are most difficult to mitigate and, thus, are the focus of this paper. The present narrative review sketches a summary of theoretical models commonly utilized to understand and help address medication nonadherence; uses a patient-centered care approach to contextualize the problem of nonadherence to drug therapies; and then outlines a set of best-practice recommendations based on the extant data and framed from the perspective of the Information-Motivation-Strategy model.

Do incentives undermine intrinsic motivation? Increases in intrinsic motivation within an incentive-based intervention for people living with HIV in Tanzania

BACKGROUND

Cash and in-kind incentives can improve health outcomes in various settings; however, there is concern that incentives may 'crowd out' intrinsic motivation to engage in beneficial behaviors. We examined this hypothesis in a randomized trial of food and cash incentives for people living with HIV infection in Tanzania.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 469 individuals randomized to one of three study arms: standard of care, short-term cash transfers, or short-term food assistance. Eligible participants were: 1) ≥18 years old; 2) HIV-infected; 3) food insecure; and 4) initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) ≤90 days before the study. Food or cash transfers, valued at ~$11 per month and conditional on attending clinic visits, were provided for ≤6 months. Intrinsic motivation was measured at baseline, 6, and 12 months using the autonomous motivation section of the Treatment Self-Regulation Questionnaire (TSRQ). We compared the change in TSRQ score from baseline to 6 and 12 months and the change within study arms.

RESULTS

The mean intrinsic motivation score was 2.79 at baseline (range: 1-3), 2.91 at 6 months (range: 1-3), and 2.95 at 12 months (range: 2-3), which was 6 months after the incentives had ended. Among all patients, the intrinsic motivation score increased by 0.13 points at 6 months (95% CI (0.09, 0.17), Cohen's d = 0.29) and 0.19 points at 12 months (95% CI (0.14, 0.24), Cohen's d = 0.49). Intrinsic motivation also increased within each study group at 6 months: 0.15 points in the food arm (95% CI (0.09, 0.21), Cohen's d = 0.37), 0.11 points in the cash arm (95% CI (0.05, 0.18), Cohen's d = 0.25), and 0.08 points in the comparison arm (95% CI (-0.03, 0.19), Cohen's d = 0.21); findings were similar at 12 months. Increases in motivation were statistically similar between arms at 6 and 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Intrinsic motivation for ART adherence increased significantly both overall and within the food and cash incentive arms, even after the incentive period was over. Increases in motivation did not differ by study group. These results suggest that incentive interventions for treatment adherence should not be withheld due to concerns of crowding out intrinsic motivation.

The effect of financial incentives on patients' motivation for treatment: results of "Money for Medication," a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Offering financial incentives is an effective intervention for improving adherence in patients taking antipsychotic depot medication. We assessed whether patients' motivation for treatment might be reduced after receiving financial rewards.

METHODS

This study was part of Money for Medication, a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, which demonstrated the positive effects of financial incentives on antipsychotic depot compliance. Three mental healthcare institutions in Dutch secondary psychiatric care services participated. Eligible patients were aged 18-65 years, had been diagnosed with schizophrenia or another psychotic disorder, had been prescribed antipsychotic depot medication or had an indication to start using depot medication, and were participating in outpatient treatment. For 12 months, patients were randomly assigned either to treatment as usual (control group) or to treatment as usual plus a financial reward for each depot of medication received (€30 per month if fully compliant; intervention group). They were followed up for 6 months, during which time no monetary rewards were offered for taking antipsychotic medication. To assess treatment motivation after 0, 12 and 18 months, interviews were conducted using a supplement to the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS) and the Treatment Entry Questionnaire (TEQ).

RESULTS

Patients were randomly assigned to the intervention (n = 84) or the control group (n = 85). After 12 months, HoNOS motivation scores were available for 131 patients (78%). Ninety-one percent of the patients had no or mild motivational problems for overall treatment; over time, there were no significant differences between the intervention and control groups. TEQ data was available for a subgroup of patients (n = 61), and showed no significant differences over time between the intervention and control groups for external motivation (β = 0.37 95% CI: -2.49 - 3.23, p = 0.799); introjected motivation (β = - 2.39 95% CI: -6.22 - 1.44, p = 0.222); and identified motivation (β = - 0.91 95% CI: -4.42 - 2.61, p = 0.613). After the 6-month follow-up period, results for the HoNOS and TEQ scores remained comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Offering financial incentives for taking antipsychotic depot medication does not reduce patients' motivation for treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial registration, number NTR2350 .

Accuracy in 24-hour Urine Collection at a Tertiary Center

There is a paucity of studies addressing the accuracy of 24-hour urine collection for assessing stone risk parameters. Collection accuracy is thought to be essential for assigning optimal therapy for stone prevention. The objective of this study was to determine factors associated with accurate and inaccurate collections. During a 2-year period (2015-2016), 241 stone formers completed 24-hour urine collections. They were divided into accurate collectors (AC), defined as at least one accurate urine collection, and inaccurate collectors (IC). Accuracy was assessed by 24-hour urine creatinine (Cr) excretion indexed to body weight (normal: males, 20-25 mg Cr/kg; females, 15-20 mg Cr/kg). Demographic data analyzed included age, gender, race, insurance status, partner status, income, and education. Statistical analysis methods included the chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and the two-group t-test. Average age was 50.7 years at the time of collection; 50.2% were men, 86% were white, and 14% were black. Overall, 51.0% of collections were inaccurate. There was no statistical significance between AC and IC for gender (P = 0.85), race (P = 0.90), insurance status (P = 0.85), recurrence (P = 0.87), stone type (P = 0.57), education (P = 0.35), income (P 5 0.42), or poverty (P = 0.35). Older age (P = 0.017) and having a partner (P = 0.022) were significantly associated with AC. The high rate of inaccurate 24-hour urine collections is a concern. The only factors we identified as influencing collection accuracy were age and partner status. These results underscore the importance of developing methods to improve the accuracy of collecting 24-hour urine samples.

Ethical acceptability of offering financial incentives for taking antipsychotic depot medication: patients' and clinicians' perspectives after a 12-month randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A randomized controlled trial 'Money for Medication'(M4M) was conducted in which patients were offered financial incentives for taking antipsychotic depot medication. This study assessed the attitudes and ethical considerations of patients and clinicians who participated in this trial.

METHODS

Three mental healthcare institutions in secondary psychiatric care in the Netherlands participated in this study. Patients (n = 169), 18-65 years, diagnosed with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or another psychotic disorder who had been prescribed antipsychotic depot medication, were randomly assigned to receive 12 months of either treatment as usual plus a financial reward for each depot of medication received (intervention group) or treatment as usual alone (control group). Structured questionnaires were administered after the 12-month intervention period. Data were available for 133 patients (69 control and 64 intervention) and for 97 clinicians.

RESULTS

Patients (88%) and clinicians (81%) indicated that financial incentives were a good approach to improve medication adherence. Ethical concerns were categorized according to the four-principles approach (autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice). Patients and clinicians alike mentioned various advantages of M4M in clinical practice, such as increased medication adherence and improved illness insight; but also disadvantages such as reduced intrinsic motivation, loss of autonomy and feelings of dependence.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, patients evaluated financial incentives as an effective method of improving medication adherence and were willing to accept this reward during clinical treatment. Clinicians were also positive about the use of this intervention in daily practice. Ethical concerns are discussed in terms of patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. We conclude that this intervention is ethically acceptable under certain conditions, and that further research is necessary to clarify issues of benefit, motivation and the preferred size and duration of the incentive.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Nederlands Trial Register, number NTR2350 .