Developing consensus-based policy solutions for medicines adherence for Europe: a Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Non-adherence to prescribed medication is a pervasive problem that can incur serious effects on patients' health outcomes and well-being, and the availability of resources in healthcare systems. This study aimed to develop practical consensus-based policy solutions to address medicines non-adherence for Europe.

METHODS

A four-round Delphi study was conducted. The Delphi Expert Panel comprised 50 participants from 14 countries and was representative of: patient/carers organisations; healthcare providers and professionals; commissioners and policy makers; academics; and industry representatives. Participants engaged in the study remotely, anonymously and electronically. Participants were invited to respond to open questions about the causes, consequences and solutions to medicines non-adherence. Subsequent rounds refined responses, and sought ratings of the relative importance, and operational and political feasibility of each potential solution to medicines non-adherence. Feedback of individual and group responses was provided to participants after each round. Members of the Delphi Expert Panel and members of the research group participated in a consensus meeting upon completion of the Delphi study to discuss and further refine the proposed policy solutions.

RESULTS

43 separate policy solutions to medication non-adherence were agreed by the Panel. 25 policy solutions were prioritised based on composite scores for importance, and operational and political feasibility. Prioritised policy solutions focused on interventions for patients, training for healthcare professionals, and actions to support partnership between patients and healthcare professionals. Few solutions concerned actions by governments, healthcare commissioners, or interventions at the system level.

CONCLUSIONS

Consensus about practical actions necessary to address non-adherence to medicines has been developed for Europe. These actions are also applicable to other regions. Prioritised policy solutions for medicines non-adherence offer a benefit to policymakers and healthcare providers seeking to address this multifaceted, complex problem.

Management of patient adherence to medications: protocol for an online survey of doctors, pharmacists and nurses in Europe

Introduction It is widely recognised that many patients do not take prescribed medicines as advised. Research in this field has commonly focused on the role of the patient in non-adherence; however, healthcare professionals can also have a major influence on patient behaviour in taking medicines. This study examines the perceptions, beliefs and behaviours of healthcare professionals-doctors, pharmacists and nurses-about patient medication adherence. Methods and analysis This paper describes the study protocol and online questionnaire used in a cross-sectional survey of healthcare professionals in Europe. The participating countries include Austria, Belgium, France, Greece, The Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Switzerland, Hungary, Italy and England. The study population comprises primary care and community-based doctors, pharmacists and nurses involved in the care of adult patients taking prescribed medicines for chronic and acute illnesses. Discussion Knowledge of the nature, extent and variability of the practices of healthcare professionals to support medication adherence could inform future service design, healthcare professional education, policy and research.

Derivation and validation of the ASK-12 adherence barrier survey

BACKGROUND

The ASK-20 survey is a previously validated patient-report measure of barriers to medication adherence and adherence-related behavior.

OBJECTIVE

To derive and validate a shorter version of the ASK-20 scale.

METHODS

Patients with asthma, diabetes, and congestive heart failure were recruited from a university medical center. Participants completed the ASK-20 survey and other questionnaires. Approximately one-third of participants were randomized to a 2-week retest administration. Item performance and results of an exploratory factor analysis were examined for item reduction and subscale identification. Subsequent analyses examined reliability and validity of the shorter version of the ASK.

RESULTS

A total of 112 patients participated (75.9% female; mean age 46.7 y; 53.6% African American). Eight items were dropped from the ASK-20 based on factor loadings, floor effects, Cronbach's alpha, and the ability of each item to discriminate between groups of patients differing in self-reported adherence. The new total score (ASK-12) had good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.75) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation 0.79). Convergent validity was demonstrated through correlations with the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (r -0.74; p < 0.001), condition-specific measures, the SF-12 Mental Component Score (r -0.32; p < 0.01), and proportion of days covered by filled medication prescriptions in the past 6 months as indicated by pharmacy claims data (r -0.20; p = 0.059). The ASK-12 total score also discriminated among groups of patients who differed in self-reported adherence indicators, including whether a dose was missed in the past week, the number of days medication was not taken as directed, and treatment satisfaction. Three subscales were identified (adherence behavior, health beliefs, inconvenience/forgetfulness), and results provided initial support for their validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The ASK-12 demonstrated adequate reliability and validity, and it may be a useful brief measure of adherence behavior and barriers to treatment adherence.

Further testing of the reliability and validity of the ASK-20 adherence barrier questionnaire in a medical center outpatient population

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the psychometric properties of the ASK-20 questionnaire, which was developed to assess barriers to medication adherence.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients with asthma, diabetes, and congestive heart failure were recruited from a university medical center. Participants in this convenience sample completed the ASK-20 questionnaire and other questionnaires. Approximately one-third of participants were randomized to a 2-week retest administration. Analyses examined the reliability and validity of the ASK-20.

RESULTS

A total of 112 patients participated (75.9% female; mean age = 46.7 years). The ASK-20 had good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.76) and test-retest reliability (0.80). Concurrent validity was demonstrated through significant correlations with the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (r = -0.61, p < 0.001), condition-specific measures, and the SF-12 Mental Component Summary score (r = -0.40, p < 0.001). The correlation of the ASK-20 with proportion of days covered by filled medication prescriptions in the past 6 months (based on pharmacy claims) was relatively weak (r = -0.13), but in the expected direction. The ASK-20 total score significantly discriminated among groups of patients who differed in self-reported indicators including the Morisky score; missing a medication dose in the past week; number of days medication was not taken as directed; and treatment satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

The ASK-20 demonstrated adequate reliability and validity, and it may be a useful measure of barriers to treatment adherence across a spectrum of chronic diseases. Limitations related to scale construction, lack of longitudinal data, and item characteristics are discussed.