[Manualized psychotherapy for the optimization of immunosuppressant adherence following kidney transplantation: Results of a feasibility study]

Prospective single-centre clinical observational study on electronically monitored medication non-adherence, its psychosocial risk factors and lifestyle behaviours after heart transplantation: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

In heart transplant recipients (HTRs), non-adherence (NA) to immunosuppressive (IS) medication and to recommended lifestyle behaviours are a common phenomenon and associated with higher risk of allograft rejection, organ loss and mortality. Risk factors for NA are highly diverse and still insufficiently researched. Precise measures of NA and an accurate understanding of its aetiology are of undisputable importance to detect patients at risk and intervene accordingly. The aim of this study is to assess the accuracy and concordance of different measures for NA as well as to determine potential risk factors.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a single-centre prospective observational trial. HTRs who are at least aged 18 are no less than 6 months post-transplant and receive tacrolimus (Prograf or Advagraf), cyclosporine (Sandimmun) or everolimus (Certican) as their prescribed IS medication are eligible for participation. We only include patients during the phase of medication implementation. At study enrolment, we assess depression, health-related quality of life, self-efficacy, social support, attachment, experiences and attitudes towards IS medication, emotional responses after transplantation, satisfaction with information about IS medication and perceptions and beliefs about medications. We further ask patients to rate their lifestyle behaviours concerning alcohol, smoking, diet, physical activity, sun protection and appointment keeping via questionnaires. Three different measurement methods for NA are applied at T0: self-reports, physician's estimates and IS trough levels. NA is monitored prospectively using an electronic multicompartment pillbox (MEMS, VAICA) over a 3-month period. Meanwhile, participants receive phone calls every second week to obtain additional self-reports, resulting in a total of seven measurement points.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Clinical Ethics Committee of the University Hospital Erlangen (Friedrich-Alexander-University, Erlangen-Nürnberg). Written informed consent is attained from all participants. The results of this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00020496.

Accuracy and concordance of measurement methods to assess non-adherence after renal transplantation - a prospective study

Background

Non-adherence (NA) to immunosuppressants (IS) among renal transplant recipients (RTRs) is associated with higher risk of allograft rejection, graft loss, and mortality. A precise measurement of NA is indispensable, although its prevalence differs greatly depending on the respective measurement methods. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy and concordance of different measurement methods of NA in patients after renal transplantation.

Design and methods

This was a single-center prospective observational study. At baseline (T0), NA was measured via physicians’ estimates (PE), self-reports (SR), and tacrolimus trough level variability (CV%) in 78 RTRs. A Visual Analogue Scale (VAS, 0–100%) was applied both for SR and PE. In addition, we used BAASIS© for SR and a 5-point Likert scale for PE. NA was measured prospectively via electronic monitoring (EM, VAICA©) during a three month period. Meanwhile, all participants received phone calls in a two week interval (T1-T6) during which SRs were given.

Results

Seventy-eight RTRs participated in our study. At t0, NA rates of 6.4%, 28.6%, and 15.4% were found for PE, SR, and CV%, respectively. No correlation was found between these methods. During the study, the percentages of self-reported and electronically monitored adherence remained high, with a minimum mean of 91.2% for the strictest adherence measure (Timing Adherence ±30 min). Our results revealed a moderate to high association between SR and EM. In contrast to PE and CV%, SR significantly predicted electronically monitored adherence. Overall, a decreasing effect of electronically monitored adherence was found for both taking and timing adherence (±2 h, ±30 min) over the course of the study.

Discussion

The moderate to high concordance of SR and EM suggests that both methods measure NA equally accurately. SR seems to be a method that can adequately depict electronically monitored NA and may represent a good and economical instrument to assess NA in clinical practice. The increased adherence at the beginning of the study and its subsequent decrease suggests an intervention effect. Surveillance of IS intake via EM with intermittent phone calls could improve adherence on a short-term basis. To establish long-term effects, further research is necessary.