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

Operationalizing Equity, Inclusion, and Access in Research Practice at a Large Academic Institution

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare advances are hindered by underrepresentation in prospective research; sociodemographic, data, and measurement infidelity in retrospective research; and a paucity of guidelines surrounding equitable research practices.

OBJECTIVE

The Joint Research Practices Working Group was created in 2021 to develop and disseminate guidelines for the conduct of inclusive and equitable research.

METHODS

Volunteer faculty and staff from two research centers at the University of Pennsylvania initiated a multi-pronged approach to guideline development, including literature searches, center-level feedback, and mutual learning with local experts.

RESULTS

We developed guidelines for (1) participant payment and incentives; (2) language interpretation and translation; (3) plain language in research communications; (4) readability of study materials; and (5) inclusive language for scientific communications. Key recommendations include (1) offer cash payments and multiple payment options to participants when required actions are completed; (2) identify top languages of your target population, map points of contact, and determine available interpretation and translation resources; (3) assess reading levels of materials and simplify language, targeting 6th- to 8th-grade reading levels; (4) improve readability through text formatting and style, symbols, and visuals; and (5) use specific, humanizing terms as adjectives rather than nouns.

CONCLUSIONS

Diversity, inclusion, and access are critical values for research conduct that promotes justice and equity. These values can be operationalized through organizational commitment that combines bottom-up and top-down approaches and through partnerships across organizations that promote mutual learning and synergy. While our guidelines represent best practices at one time, we recognize that practices evolve and need to be evaluated continuously for accuracy and relevance. Our intention is to bring awareness to these critical topics and form a foundation for important conversations surrounding equitable and inclusive research practices.

Take patients seriously when they say financial incentives help with adherence

Small financial incentives have been proven effective at promoting healthy behaviours across medicine, including in psychiatry. There are a range of philosophical and practical objections to financial incentives. Drawing on the existing literature, specifically attempts to use financial incentives to promote antipsychotic adherence, we propose a 'patient-centred' view of evaluating financial incentive regimes. We argue that there is evidence that mental health patients like financial incentives, considering them fair and respectful. The enthusiasm of mental health patients for financial incentives lends support to their use, although it does not invalidate all objections against them.

Regular support provided by dermatological nurses improves outcomes in patients with psoriasis treated with topical drugs: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patient adherence to topical antipsoriatic drugs is often poor, leading to poor efficacy. Use of long-term support delivered by dermatological nurses to patients treated with topical drugs may improve outcome.

AIM

To evaluate whether regular support from dermatological nurses improves outcome and treatment adherence in patients with psoriasis receiving topical medications.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) (clinicaltrials.gov registration NCT04220554), in which patients received once-daily topical medications (containing corticosteroids and/or calcipotriol) for as long as their psoriasis was visible. The patients were randomly allocated to standard care by the dermatologist either with (n = 51) or without (n = 52) support from dermatological nurses. The nurse support intervention consisted of a structured dermatological consultation at baseline and Week 1, followed by contact with a nurse each month (in the outpatient clinic or by telephone). The primary outcome was severity of psoriasis, which was measured by the Lattice System Physician's Global Assessment (LS-PGA) and assessed by intention-to-treat analyses using linear mixed regression models for longitudinal data. Secondary outcomes were quality of life (measured by the Dermatology Life Quality Index; DLQI) and good adherence (defined as use of ≥ 80% of recommended doses).

RESULTS

In total, 92 patients (89%) completed the 48-week trial period. The intervention group improved more than the nonintervention group from baseline to Week 24 in LS-PGA (2.21 vs. 1.28, P = 0.001) and in DLQI at Week 12 (6.50 vs. 1.55, P < 0.001). Differences between the two groups in favour of the intervention were observed throughout the study period. More participants in the intervention group had good adherence compared with the nonintervention group (36% vs. 14%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Regular, continued patient support from dermatological nurses increased the efficacy of psoriasis treatment, improved quality of life and enhanced long-term adherence to topical antipsoriatic drugs. However, there is still room for more improvement.

The acceptability of financial incentives to support service engagement of adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness: a qualitative study of key stakeholder perspectives Authorship

PURPOSE

Evidence suggests financial incentives may effectively support service engagement among people experiencing homelessness, but literature related to their acceptability in this population is limited. This study used qualitative methods to explore stakeholder perspectives on the acceptability of using financial incentives to promote service engagement among homeless adults with mental illness.

METHODS

As part of a larger mixed-methods pragmatic trial of a community-based brief case management program in Toronto, Canada, twenty-two trial participants were purposefully recruited to participate in semi-structured qualitative interviews, and five service providers and seven key informants were purposefully recruited to participate in a focus group and interviews, respectively. Topics included perspectives of acceptability and lived experiences of using financial incentives to support engagement, health and well-being. Data collection occurred between April 2019 and December 2020. Data was audio-recorded and transcribed. Coding and interpretation of data was informed by grounded theory and inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Stakeholders held diverse views on the acceptability of financial incentives to promote service engagement in this population. Main themes across groups included moralizing recipient motivation; tensions in how best to define and respect autonomy; and consideration of potential unintended consequences for both individuals and the service system. Significant group differences within some themes emerged.

CONCLUSION

Results highlight ongoing debates over using financial incentives to facilitate service engagement among adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness. Differences in stakeholder perspectives suggest the need for person-centredness in health and research settings, and balancing theoretical risks and long-term goals with likely potential for immediate benefits.

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.

Do financial incentives increase mental health treatment engagement? A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Engagement in mental health treatment is low, which can lead to poor outcomes. We evaluated the efficacy of offering patients financial incentives to increase their mental health treatment engagement, also referred to as contingency management.

METHOD

We meta-analyzed studies offering financial incentives for mental health treatment engagement, including increasing treatment attendance, medication adherence, and treatment goal completion. Analyses were run within a multilevel framework. All study designs were included, and sensitivity analyses were run including only randomized and high-quality studies.

RESULTS

About 80% of interventions incentivized treatment for substance use disorders. Financial incentives significantly increased treatment attendance (Hedges' g = 0.49, [0.33, 0.64], k = 30, I2 = 83.14), medication adherence (Hedges' g = 0.95, [0.47, 1.44], k = 6, I2 = 87.73), and treatment goal completion (Hedges' g = 0.61, [0.22, 0.99], k = 5, I2 = 60.55), including completing homework, signing treatment plans, and reducing problematic behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

Financial incentives increase treatment engagement with medium to large effect sizes. We provide strong evidence for their effectiveness in increasing substance use treatment engagement and preliminary evidence for their effectiveness in increasing treatment engagement for other mental health disorders. Future research should prioritize testing the efficacy of incentivizing treatment engagement for mental health disorders aside from substance use. Research must also identify ways to incentivize treatment engagement that improve functioning and long-term outcomes and address ethical and systemic barriers to implementing these interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Using financial incentives to support service engagement of adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness: A qualitative analysis of key stakeholder perspectives

Introduction

Homelessness and mental illness are associated with poor service engagement, health and health service use outcomes. Existing literature suggests that financial incentives may effectively support service engagement of this population, but studies investigating key stakeholder perspectives are lacking. This study aimed to elicit, using qualitative methods, nuanced service user and provider experiences by using financial incentives to support service engagement among adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness.

Methods

This qualitative study is part of a larger mixed‐methods pragmatic trial of financial incentives (Coordinated Access to Care for the Homeless—Financial Incentives [CATCH‐FI]) within a community‐based brief case management programme (CATCH) in Toronto, Ontario. Twenty‐two CATCH‐FI participants were purposefully recruited to participate in in‐depth, semi‐structured interviews; five CATCH service providers participated in a focus group and seven key informants in individual interviews. Data collection occurred between April 2019 and December 2020. All interviews and the focus group were audio‐recorded and transcribed. Topic guides prompted participant perspectives on and experiences of using financial incentives to support engagement, health and well‐being. Grounded theory and inductive thematic analysis guided coding and interpretation of transcripts. Triangulation and member‐checking enhanced the analytical rigour and validity of findings.

Results

CATCH service providers, key informants and subgroup of CATCH‐FI participants perceived financial incentives to directly facilitate service engagement. The majority of CATCH‐FI participants however highlighted that intrinsic motivation and service quality may be relatively more important facilitators of engagement. Most study participants across stakeholder groups perceived that financial incentives have direct positive influences on health and well‐being in enabling access to basic needs and simple pleasures.

Conclusions

Our data suggest that for some adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness, financial incentives can directly support service engagement. In addition, financial incentives may positively impact health and well‐being by easing financial stress and enabling deeper attention to individual health needs. Further research on the effectiveness and acceptability of financial incentives is needed to improve understanding and uptake of a promising intervention to support health and health service use outcomes in an underserved population.

Patient or Public Contribution

Study participants provided input into the study research questions, study design, interview guides and interpretation of findings.

Long-term improvement of psoriasis patients' adherence to topical drugs: testing a patient-supporting intervention delivered by healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis affects 2-4% of the Western adult population and is a socio-economic burden for patients and society. Topical drugs are recommended as first-line treatment for mild-to-moderate psoriasis, but low adherence is a barrier to treatment success. Psoriasis patients require support, in order to improve their long-term use of topical drugs. The project aims to test whether a patient-supporting intervention delivered by dermatology nurses can reduce the severity of psoriasis, improve the use of topical drugs, and is cost-effective compared to standard procedure.

METHODS

The intervention consists of improved support delivered to patients by three experienced dermatology nurses, who will support patients on a regular basis by consultations with a focus on providing reminder systems, accountability, reinforcement, and building trust in the treatment. Each patient will be supported by the same dermatology nurse throughout the entire study period. The effect will be compared with standard procedure. The intervention will be tested in a randomized controlled trial during a 48-week period. A group of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis (psoriasis affecting ≥ 4% of the total body surface area) and 18-85 years of age who are prescribed topical treatment will be randomized to a non-intervention (n ≈ 57) or intervention group (n ≈ 57). Participants in both arms will be prescribed topical preparations containing corticosteroid and/or calcipotriol. The primary outcome will be a change in the severity of psoriasis, measured as reduction in the Lattice-System Physician's Global Assessment. Secondary outcomes will include changes in health-related quality of life (measured by disease specific and generic questionnaires), primary adherence (i.e., proportion of filled prescriptions), and secondary adherence by objective measure (rate of topical drug consumption (obtained by weighing medication packages) compared to estimated recommended consumption). A health economic evaluation is planned to run alongside the trial. Participants' total health costs will be estimated on the basis of health costs reported to the national health registries and costs spent on the intervention, after which a cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis will be carried out.

DISCUSSION

If the intervention can reduce the severity of psoriasis in a significant manner and is economically favorable compared to standard treatment, there is potential for implementing the intervention in dermatology clinics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04220554 . Registered on January 7, 2020. Study results, either positive, negative, or inconclusive, will be published on www.clinicaltrials.gov . Trial registration no. with the Danish Regional Committee on Health Research Ethics, registration no. 72613.

The Impact of Financial Incentives on Service Engagement Among Adults Experiencing Homelessness and Mental Illness: A Pragmatic Trial Protocol

Background: People experiencing homelessness and mental illness have poorer service engagement and health-related outcomes compared to the general population. Financial incentives have been associated with increased service engagement, but evidence of effectiveness is limited. This protocol evaluates the acceptability and impact of financial incentives on service engagement among adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness in Toronto, Canada. Methods: This study protocol uses a pragmatic field trial design and mixed methods (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03770221). Study participants were recruited from a brief multidisciplinary case management program for adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness following hospital discharge, and were randomly assigned to usual care or a financial incentives arm offering $20 for each week they attended meetings with a program provider. The primary outcome of effectiveness is service engagement, measured by the count of participant-provider health-care contacts over the 6-month period post-randomization. Secondary health, health service use, quality of life, and housing outcomes were measured at baseline and at 6-month follow-up. Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and inferential modeling including Poisson regression and generalized estimating equations. A subset of study participants and other key informants participated in interviews, and program staff in focus groups, to explore experiences with and perspectives regarding financial incentives. Qualitative data will be rigorously coded and thematically analyzed. Conclusions: Findings from this study will contribute high quality evidence to an underdeveloped literature base on the effectiveness and acceptability of financial incentives to improve service engagement and health-related outcomes among adults experiencing homelessness and mental illness.

Acceptability of financial incentives for health-related behavior change: An updated systematic review

Despite the successes of financial incentives in increasing uptake of evidence-based interventions, acceptability is polarized. Given widespread interest in the use of financial incentives, we update findings from Giles and colleagues' 2015 systematic review (n = 81). The objectives of this systematic review are to identify what is known about financial incentives directed to patients for health-related behavior change, assess how acceptability varies, and address which aspects and features of financial incentives are potentially acceptable and not acceptable, and why. PRISMA guidelines were used for searching peer-reviewed journals across 10 electronic databases. We included empirical and non-empirical papers published between 1/1/14 and 6/1/18. After removal of duplicates, abstract screening, and full-text reviews, 47 papers (n = 31 empirical, n = 16 scholarly) met inclusion criteria. We assessed empirical papers for risk of bias and conducted a content analysis of extracted data to synthesize key findings. Five themes related to acceptability emerged from the data: fairness, messaging, character, liberty, and tradeoffs. The wide range of stakeholders generally preferred rewards over penalties, vouchers over cash, smaller values over large, and certain rewards over lotteries. Deposits were viewed unfavorably. Findings were mixed on acceptability of targeting specific populations. Breastfeeding, medication adherence, smoking cessation, and vaccination presented as more complicated incentive targets than physical activity, weight loss, and self-management. As researchers, clinicians, and policymakers explore the use of financial incentives for challenging health behaviors, additional research is needed to understand how acceptability influences uptake and ultimately health outcomes.

Comparison of Interventions to Improve Long-Term Medication Adherence Across Different Clinical Conditions: A Systematic Review With Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Medication non-adherence has a dynamic, temporal and multifactorial nature with a significant impact on economic and clinical outcomes. Interventions to improve adherence are complex and require adaptation to patients' needs, which may include patient's medical conditions. The aim of this study was to assess the comparative effectiveness of medication adherence interventions per type of clinical condition on adult patients.

Methods: A systematic review with network meta-analysis was performed (PROSPERO registration number of CRD42018054598). An initial Pubmed search was conducted to select meta-analyses reporting results of interventions aiming to improve medication adherence. Primary studies were selected and those reporting results with a long-term follow up (≥10 months) on adult patients were included for data extraction. Study characteristics, description of interventions and adherence outcomes were extracted. Adherence interventions were classified in four groups: educational, attitudinal, technical, and rewards. Clinical conditions were classified in four groups: circulatory system and metabolic diseases, infectious diseases, musculoskeletal diseases, and mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders. Network meta-analyses with effect sizes expressed as odds ratio (OR) with a 95% credibility interval (CrI) were built. Ranking probabilities for each measure of adherence were calculated by using surface under the cumulative ranking analysis (SUCRA).

Results: A total of 61 meta-analysis and 149 primary studies were included in the qualitative synthesis and 80 primary studies in the quantitative analysis. The most effective interventions were: educational + technical 79.6% [OR: 0.44 (CrI: 0.26, 0.73)] and 73.3% [OR: 0.56 (0.36, 0.84)] in circulatory system and metabolic diseases and infectious diseases respectively. Attitudinal intervention had the greatest probability for musculoskeletal diseases of 92.3% in SUCRA [OR: 0.30 (0.10, 0.86)]. Finally, educational + attitudinal interventions had the greatest effect (SUCRA 73.8%) for mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders, although this was not significant according to consistency analysis.

Conclusion: Effectiveness of interventions seems to be related to the clinical condition. Educational and technical interventions resulted in a major effect on long-term management of medication adherence in patients with infectious diseases (HIV) and circulatory system and metabolic diseases whereas attitudinal components presented a higher effect on musculoskeletal and mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders.

Future development of a depot antiepileptic drug: What are the ethical implications?

Depot medications have been used for long-term treatment of many different medical conditions (schizophrenia, opioid addiction) and for prevention of pregnancy (birth control). In addition, proposals for depot medication for antidepressants have been made as a possible treatment for chronic depression. For the treatment of chronic epilepsy, there are currently no depot antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). However, there may be a role for them. Depot AEDs could improve medication adherence rates, thereby reducing the morbidity and mortality that are associated with ongoing seizures. This could help to reduce hospital costs for people with epilepsy. Potential patient populations that could benefit from a depot AED include patients with forgetfulness, socioeconomic barriers to access of daily oral medications, impaired gastric absorption or dysphagia, comorbid epilepsy and psychiatric disease, and personal preference to avoid the inconvenience of taking a medication daily or even multiple times per day. In this article, we review reasons to create a depot AED and the outcomes of doing so in the context of the pillars of bioethics: beneficence (to act in a patient's best interest), autonomy (to respect a patient as an individual and honor their preferences), nonmaleficence (to do no harm), and justice (to treat all persons fairly and equally).