Evaluation of the Measurement Properties of Self-reported Medication Adherence Instruments Among People at Risk for Metabolic Syndrome: A Systematic Review

Improving medication adherence in cardiovascular disease

Non-adherence to medication is a global health problem with far-reaching individual-level and population-level consequences but remains unappreciated and under-addressed in the clinical setting. With increasing comorbidity and polypharmacy as well as an ageing population, cardiovascular disease and medication non-adherence are likely to become increasingly prevalent. Multiple methods for detecting non-adherence exist but are imperfect, and, despite emerging technology, a gold standard remains elusive. Non-adherence to medication is dynamic and often has multiple causes, particularly in the context of cardiovascular disease, which tends to require lifelong medication to control symptoms and risk factors in order to prevent disease progression. In this Review, we identify the causes of medication non-adherence and summarize interventions that have been proven in randomized clinical trials to be effective in improving adherence. Practical solutions and areas for future research are also proposed.

Quality of measurement properties of medication adherence instruments in cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Medication adherence has a major impact on reducing mortality and healthcare costs related to the treatment of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes mellitus. Selecting the best patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) among the many available for this kind of patient is extremely important. This study aims to critically assess, compare and synthesize the quality of the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures to assess medication adherence among patients with cardiovascular diseases and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

This review followed the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines and was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The searches were performed in Web of Science, SCOPUS, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, PsycINFO, and ProQuest (gray literature).

RESULTS

A total of 110 records encompassing 27 different PROMs were included in the review. The included records were published between 1986 and 2023, most of which reported studies conducted in the United States and were published in English. None of the PROMs were classified in the category "a", thus being recommended for use due to the quality of its measurement properties. The PROMs that should not be recommended for use (category "c") are the MTA, GMAS, DMAS-7, MALMAS, ARMS-D, and 5-item questionnaire. The remaining PROMs, e.g., MMAS-8, SMAQ, MEDS, MNPS, ARMS-12, MGT, MTA-OA, MTA-Insulin, LMAS-14, MARS-5, A-14, ARMS-10, IADMAS, MAQ, MMAS-5, ProMAS, ARMS-7, 3-item questionnaire, AS, 12-item questionnaire, and Mascard were considered as having the potential to be recommended for use (category "b").

CONCLUSION

None of the included PROMs met the criteria for being classified as trusted and recommended for use for patients with cardiovascular diseases and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, 21 PROMs have the potential to be recommended for use, but further studies are needed to ensure their quality based on the COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019129109.

Qualitative Interviews to Support Development and Cognitive Debriefing of the Adelphi Adherence Questionnaire (ADAQ©): A Patient-Reported Measure of Medication Adherence Developed for Use in a Range of Diseases, Treatment Modalities, and Countries

PURPOSE

The Adelphi Adherence Questionnaire (ADAQ©) is a newly developed generic patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment of medication adherence. The aim was to assess its content validity by conducting cognitive debriefing (CD) interviews with patients prescribed medication(s) of various treatment modalities in a range of therapy areas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Targeted literature/instrument review and concept elicitation interviews informed development of the ADAQ©. CD interviews were conducted with 57 adults from the United States of America (USA; n = 21), Spain (n = 18), and Germany (n = 18) who prescribed medication for hypertension, diabetes, depression, schizophrenia, asthma, multiple myeloma, psoriasis, and/or multiple sclerosis. Interviews were conducted in two rounds to explore the relevance and understanding of the item wording, instructions, recall period and response options. Verbatim transcripts were analysed in ATLAS.Ti using thematic analysis. Three expert clinicians provided guidance throughout the study.

RESULTS

ADAQ© items/instructions were well understood and relevant to participants. Key modifications following round 1 included revising instructions to refer to current medication(s) for one condition to reduce cognitive burden, removing two items with lower relevance (specifically those assessing running out of medication and social discouragement), and adding a response option for participants to indicate if they had stopped taking a medication. Minor wording modifications were made following round 2. Subgroup differences in item relevance were explored based on clinical characteristics. Cost of medication was more relevant amongst US participants.

CONCLUSION

Content validity of the ADAQ© was confirmed in demographically and clinically diverse participants. Psychometric properties of the ADAQ© will be explored in future studies.

Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Medication Adherence in Cardiovascular Disease: A COSMIN Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Several medication adherence patient-reported outcome measures (MA-PROMs) are available for use in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD); however, little evidence is available on the most suitable MA-PROM to measure medication adherence in patients with CVD. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesise the measurement properties of MA-PROMs for patients with CVD and identify the most suitable MA-PROM for use in clinical practice or future research in patients with CVD.

METHODS

An electronic search of nine databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ProQuest Health and Medicine, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science) was conducted to identify studies that have reported on at least one of the measurement properties of MA-PROMs in patients with CVD. The methodological quality of the studies included in the systematic review was evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.

RESULTS

A total of 40 MA-PROMs were identified in the 84 included studies. This review found there is a lack of moderate-to-high quality evidence of sufficient content validity for all MA-PROMs for patients with CVDs. Only eight MA-PROMs were classified in COSMIN recommendation category A. They exhibited sufficient content validity with very low-quality evidence, and moderate-to-high quality evidence for sufficient internal consistency. The 28 MA-PROMs that meet the requirements for COSMIN recommendation category 'B' require further validation studies. Four MA-PROMs including Hill-Bone Compliance Medication Scale (HBMS), the five-item Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5), Maastricht Utrecht Adherence in Hypertension (MUAH), and MUAH-16 have insufficient results with high quality evidence for at least one measurement property and consequently are not recommended for use in patients with CVD. Two MA-PROMs (Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale [ARMS] and ARMS-7) are comprehensive and have moderate to high quality evidence for four sufficient measurement properties.

CONCLUSION

From the eight MA-PROMs in COSMIN recommendation category A, ARMS and ARMS-7 were selected as the most suitable MA-PROMs for use in patients with CVD. They are the most comprehensive with be best quality evidence to support their use in clinical practice and research.

Feasibility of a Randomized Controlled Mixed Methods Trial to Address Health Literacy, Beliefs, Medication Adherence, and Self-Efficacy (ADHERE) in a Clinical Pharmacist-Led Clinic

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility and acceptability of a health literacy-psychosocial support intervention - ADHERE and explore changes in glycemic values and medication adherence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-one participants with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥ 8% were randomly allocated to control (usual care) or intervention groups (receiving usual care plus a 6-session pharmacist-led intervention focusing on the modifiable psychosocial factors that may influence medication adherence). Feasibility metrics evaluated recruitment, retention, and intervention adherence. Questionnaires were administered to collect psychosocial factors and self-reported medication adherence at baseline, the end of the intervention, 3 months, and 6 months post intervention. HbA1c values were extracted from electronic medical records. Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare differences in mean outcomes between the control and intervention groups. To assess intervention acceptability, eleven individuals participated in semi-structured interviews about their intervention experiences. Qualitative content analysis was used for analyzing the interviews.

RESULTS

Thirty participants completed the study. Overall, the findings support the feasibility of the intervention. There were significant differences in HbA1c values. Participants in the intervention group had lower A1C (8.3 ± 1.4) than in the control group (9.2 ± 1.3) at the time of 6-month follow-up (p = 0.003). In addition, the participants in the intervention group showed improved HbA1c at 6-month follow-up (8.3 ± 1.4), compared to baseline (9.4 ± 1.5, p = 0.011) and after 6-session intervention (8.9 ± 1.6, p = 0.046). However, there were no significant differences in medication adherence between groups over time. Qualitative themes suggest participants liked the intervention and perceived the additional support from the pharmacist as beneficial.

CONCLUSION

A pharmacist-led intervention to provide additional health literacy-psychosocial support may contribute to long-term improvements in HbA1c. Equipping pharmacists with patient-specific diabetes medication adherence information and building in additional follow-up support for patients may improve patient health outcomes.

A Systematic Analysis of Reviews Exploring the Scope, Validity, and Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures of Medication Adherence in Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Non-adherence to medicines is estimated to cost billions to healthcare providers across the US and Europe each year. Addressing medication adherence (MA) can be challenging. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed to collect self-reported data on MA, among other behaviours. Despite the myriad PROMs available and their widespread implementation in research, there is little commentary or standardization on the way they are reported, or their validity assessed. This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of systematic reviews (SRs) that report PROMs of MA with a focus on type 2 diabetes to explore PROM reporting and validity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Web of Science. SRs reporting on PROMs related to MA behaviour in patients living with type 2 diabetes were included. Any SR published in English prior to December 2021 was included. Abstract and title screening were performed prior to full-text review by two independent researchers with discrepancies managed by a third. Protocols and SRs reporting on paediatric populations were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 19 eligible SRs that included 241 unique PROM studies were captured from the initial 2074 records that were identified. Data were captured across a 30-year scope, with roughly half (47.4%, n=9/19) of the SRs published in the last 5 years. In total, 104 unique PROMs were identified. Inclusion of non-validated PROMs was identified in 63.2% (n=12/19) of the included SRs, and reporting issues were identified in 47.3% of studies (n=114/241). A lower journal impact factor was significantly associated with a higher prevalence of validity issues (r=0.44, p=0.04).

CONCLUSION

There are a broad range of available PROMs; however, they have been reported inconsistently in the literature, often lacking significant evidence with respect to validity criteria. Standardization of reporting and assessments of validity may help to address this.

Exploring the Agreement Between Self-Reported Medication Adherence and Pharmacy Refill-Based Measures in Patients with Kidney Disease

AIM

To assess the quantitative and categorical agreement between two methods of measuring medication adherence: pharmacy refill-based medication possession rates and self-reported medication adherence scale.

BACKGROUND

Categorisation of adherence metrics using empirical cut-off scores can lead to misclassification, which can be overcome by expressing adherence as a continuous variable. Pharmacy refill-based adherence can be reported as actual rates, but the validity of expressing self-reported medication adherence scores as a continuous variable to reflect adherence is unknown and its quantitative agreement with refill-based adherence rates untested.

METHODS

Patients with kidney disease, including dialysis patients, from Illawarra Shoalhaven region of New South Wales, Australia were recruited between January 2015 and June 2016 to this cross-sectional study. Medication adherence was assessed using the self-reported Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS) and two pharmacy refill-based measures, Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) and Proportion of Days Covered (PDC) for antihypertensives and cardiometabolic drugs. Categorical and quantitative agreement between self-reported adherence and pharmacy refill-based adherence were assessed using tests of trend, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), Cohen's kappa and Bland-Altman analysis.

RESULTS

We recruited 113 patients. There was a significant declining trend of MPR (p < 0.001) and PDC (<0.001 for antihypertensives, p = 0.004 for cardiometabolic) scores among categories with worsening MMAS adherence. Adjusted ANCOVA showed significant association between self-report and pharmacy refill-based adherence (p < 0.001). Weighted Cohen's kappa statistics showed fair agreement between the self-report and pharmacy refill-based categories. Bland-Altman's analysis showed less than 5% of cases were outside the limits of agreement (-0.36 to 0.27) and the bias for MMAS was negative (-0.05 to -0.09), indicating MMAS did not overestimate adherence.

CONCLUSION

There is modest agreement between pharmacy refill-based measures and self-report MMAS measures when assessed categorically or quantitatively. Assessing adherence as a continuous variable should be considered to overcome the challenges associated with categorization of adherence based on arbitrary thresholds.

Factors Associated with Endocrine Therapy Non-Adherence in Breast Cancer Survivors

BACKGROUND

For women with hormone receptor positive breast cancer, long-term endocrine therapy (ET) can greatly reduce the risk of recurrence, yet adherence is low- particularly among traditionally underserved populations.

METHODS

The Carolina Breast Cancer Study oversampled Black and young women (<50 years of age). Participants answered an ET-specific medication adherence questionnaire assessing reasons for non-adherence. We used principal factor analysis to identify latent factors describing ET non-adherence. We then performed multivariable regression to determine clinical and demographic characteristics associated with each ET non-adherence factor.

RESULTS

1,231 women were included in analysis, 59% reported at least one barrier to ET adherence. We identified three latent factors which we defined as: habit - challenges developing medication-taking behavior; tradeoffs - high perceived side effect burden and medication safety concerns; and resource barriers - challenges related to cost or accessibility. Older age (50+) was associated with less reporting of habit (Adjusted Risk Ratio (aRR) 0.54[95% CI: 0.43-0.69] and resource barriers (aRR 0.66[0.43-0.997]), but was not associated with tradeoff barriers. Medicaid-insured women were more likely than privately-insured to report tradeoff (aRR:1.53 [1.10-2.13]) or resource barriers (aRR:4.43[2.49-6.57]). Black race was associated with increased reporting of all factors (habit: aRR 1.29[1.09-1.53]; tradeoffs: 1.32[1.09-1.60], resources: 1.65[1.18-2.30]).

CONCLUSION

Barriers to ET adherence were described by three distinct factors, and strongly associated with sociodemographic characteristics. Barriers to ET adherence appear inadequately addressed for younger, Black, and publicly-insured breast cancer survivors. These findings underscore the importance of developing multi-faceted, patient-centered interventions that address a diverse range of barriers to ET adherence.

Development of the NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Medication Adherence Scale (PMAS)

Poor medication adherence is associated with reduced drug effectiveness, poor health-related quality of life, increased morbidity and mortality, and increased healthcare utilization and cost. Including the patient's voice is essential in understanding barriers to adherence. Useful patient-reported adherence measures are brief, inexpensive, non-invasive; can indicate barriers to adherence; and can be incorporated in electronic health records. The NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS^®) includes high-quality, freely available patient-reported measures covering many important constructs in patient-centered research but does not include a medication adherence measure. To fill this gap, we developed the PROMIS Medication Adherence Scale (PMAS) using the rigorous PROMIS instrument development guidelines. To develop the PMAS, we first conducted a review of the reviews, which enabled us to identify content areas relevant to medication adherence behavior. Then, we conducted qualitative research to elicit patients' views of and experiences with medication adherence. This process identified the following important content areas to guide item writing: extent medication is taken, knowledge of medication regimen, beliefs about medication, remembering to take medication, skipping due to side effects, skipping due to feeling better, and cost of medications. Based on the results of these activities, we wrote items and aimed to retain 1-2 items per content area. The final item set included 9 total adherence items, which were then refined through intensive comprehension and translatability review, as well as cognitive interviews. Future steps include testing the PMAS's validity.

Design and rationale of a mixed methods randomized control trial: ADdressing Health literacy, bEliefs, adheRence and self-Efficacy (ADHERE) program to improve diabetes outcomes

BACKGROUND

Improving medication adherence is one of the most effective approaches to improving the health outcomes of patients with diabetes. To date, enhancing diabetes medication adherence has occurred by improving diabetes-related knowledge. Unfortunately, behavior change often does not follow knowledge change. Enhancing communication between patients and healthcare professionals through addressing health literacy-related psychosocial attributes is critical.

OBJECTIVE

Examine whether a patient-centered intervention augmenting usual care with a health literacy-psychosocial support intervention will improve medication adherence for patients with diabetes, compared to usual care.

METHODS

This study is a randomized controlled trial with an intervention mixed methods design. Fifty participants being enrolled are English-speaking, 18-80 years old with diagnosed diabetes, take at least one diabetes medication, have low diabetes medication adherence (proportion of days covered less than 80% or based on clinical notes), and have poor diabetes control (hemoglobin A1c of ≥8%). Participants will be allocated to either a control group receiving usual care (n = 25) or an intervention group (n = 25) receiving usual care and a 6-session intervention focusing on the modifiable psychosocial factors that may influence medication adherence. A questionnaire will be administered at baseline and at the end of the intervention to all participants to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. Fifteen participants from the intervention group will be interviewed to explore participants' experiences and perceptions of the intervention processes and outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial will examine if a patient-centered intervention that addresses patients' health literacy and focuses on modifiable psychosocial factors will improve medication adherence among patients with diabetes.

Endocrine Therapy Nonadherence and Discontinuation in Black and White Women

BACKGROUND

Differential use of endocrine therapy (ET) by race may contribute to breast cancer outcome disparities, but racial differences in ET behaviors are poorly understood.

METHODS

Women aged 20-74 years with a first primary, stage I-III, hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer were included. At 2 years postdiagnosis, we assessed nonadherence, defined as not taking ET every day or missing more than two pills in the past 14 days, discontinuation, and a composite measure of underuse, defined as either missing pills or discontinuing completely. Using logistic regression, we evaluated the relationship between race and nonadherence, discontinuation, and overall underuse in unadjusted, clinically adjusted, and socioeconomically adjusted models.

RESULTS

A total of 1280 women were included; 43.2% self-identified as black. Compared to white women, black women more often reported nonadherence (13.7% vs 5.2%) but not discontinuation (10.0% vs 10.7%). Black women also more often reported the following: hot flashes, night sweats, breast sensitivity, and joint pain; believing that their recurrence risk would not change if they stopped ET; forgetting to take ET; and cost-related barriers. In multivariable analysis, black race remained statistically significantly associated with nonadherence after adjusting for clinical characteristics (adjusted odds ratio = 2.72, 95% confidence interval = 1.75 to 4.24) and after adding socioeconomic to clinical characteristics (adjusted odds ratio = 2.44, 95% confidence interval = 1.50 to 3.97) but was not independently associated with discontinuation after adjustment. Low recurrence risk perception and lack of a shared decision making were strongly predictive of ET underuse across races.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results highlight important racial differences in ET-adherence behaviors, perceptions of benefits/harms, and shared decision making that may be targeted with culturally tailored interventions.

Strengthening and implementing health technology assessment and the decision-making process in the Region of the Americas

Objective.

Health technology assessment (HTA) has been adopted by countries in order to improve allocative efficiency in their health systems. This study aimed to describe and analyze the HTA decision-making process in the Region of the Americas.

Methods.

A literature review was done to better understand the HTA situation in the Region. Also, in 2014 and 2015, individuals responsible for conducting HTA in countries of the Americas were identified and received a questionnaire on HTA and the decision-making process.

Results.

A total of 46 questionnaire responses were obtained, from 30 countries. The respondents were similar in terms of their institutions, main funding sources, and technology types assessed. Of the 46 respondents, 23 (50%) work for their respective ministry of health. Also, 36 (78%) undertake and/or coordinate HTA through coverage and reimbursement/pricing decisions and other HTA-related activities, while 24 (52%) use HTA for emerging technologies. While some countries in the Region have created formal HTA units, there is a weak link between the HTA process and decision-making. Most of the countries with recognized HTA institutions are members of the Health Technology Assessment Network of the Americas (RedETSA). Despite the advances in the Region overall, most countries in Central America and the Caribbean are still at the early stages of implementing HTA to support decision-making.

Conclusions.

Many countries in the Americas have benefited from the exchange and capacity-building opportunities within RedETSA. However, there are still many challenges to overcome in the Region in terms of the discussion and creation of HTA-related policies.