Integrated Behavioral Health and Intervention Models

A Quantitative Framework for Medication Non-Adherence: Integrating Patient Treatment Expectations and Preferences

Introduction

Medication non-adherence remains a significant challenge in healthcare, impacting treatment outcomes and the overall effectiveness of medical interventions. This article introduces a novel approach to understanding and predicting medication non-adherence by integrating patient beliefs, efficacy expectations, and perceived costs. Existing theoretical models often fall short in quantifying the impact of barrier removal on medication adherence and struggle to address cases where patients consciously choose not to follow prescribed medication regimens. In response to these limitations, this study presents an empirical framework that seeks to provide a quantifiable model for both individual and population-level prediction of non-adherence under different scenarios.

Methods

We present an empirical framework that includes a health production function, specifically applied to antihypertensive medications nonadherence. Data collection involved a pilot study that utilized a double-bound contingent-belief (DBCB) questionnaire. Through this questionnaire, participants could express how efficacy and side effects were affected by controlled levels of non-adherence, allowing for the estimation of sensitivity in health outcomes and costs.

Results

Parameters derived from the DBCB questionnaire revealed that on average, patients with hypertension anticipated that treatment efficacy was less sensitive to non-adherence than side effects. Our derived health production function suggests that patients may strategically manage adherence to minimize side effects, without compromising efficacy. Patients' inclination to manage medication intake is closely linked to the relative importance they assign to treatment efficacy and side effects. Model outcomes indicate that patients opt for full adherence when efficacy outweighs side effects. Our findings also indicated an association between income and patient expectations regarding the health of antihypertensive medications.

Conclusion

Our framework represents a pioneering effort to quantitatively link non-adherence to patient preferences. Preliminary results from our pilot study of patients with hypertension suggest that the framework offers a viable alternative for evaluating the potential impact of interventions on treatment adherence.

Using session recordings to understand the content of community-based treatment for childhood anxiety disorders and response to technology-based training

OBJECTIVE

The goal of the current study is to advance efforts to increase the quality of care for childhood anxiety disorder (CADs) through (1) detailing the content of community-based treatment sessions, (2) exploring the validity of therapist surveys, (3) examining the influence of setting differences, and (4) testing the effects of a technology-based training on use of nonexposure strategies.

METHODS

Thirteen therapists were randomly assigned to technology-based training in the use of exposure therapy or treatment as usual (TAU) for CADs. Therapeutic techniques were coded from 125 community-based treatment sessions.

RESULTS

Consistent with survey responses community therapists spent the majority of session time reviewing symptoms (34% of session time), implementing nonexposure cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT; 36%), and rarely engaged in exposure (3%). An integrated behavioral health setting was associated with greater endorsement of exposure on survey, p < 0.05, although this difference was not significant in session recordings, p = 0.14. Multilevel models indicated that technology-based training that has been shown to increase exposure, also decreased use of nonexposure CBT techniques (2% vs. 29%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The study supports the validity of survey-based findings that community-based care for CADs consists of non-exposure CBT techniques. Efforts should be invested in dissemination of within-session exposure.

Everybody Copes: An Interprofessional Workshop on Stress, Coping, and Helping Primary Care Patients Manage Medical Stressors

INTRODUCTION

The value of psychological principles has become apparent in medical settings, especially with the rise of patient-centered care. We aimed to provide a curriculum informing medical providers about the theoretical basis and clinical utility of the social-cognitive model of stress and coping.

METHODS

This workshop was delivered to an interprofessional team of faculty and trainees. Our initial pedagogical approach was to relate the concepts of cognitive appraisals and coping strategies to participants' own stress responses. We then used didactic presentation and small-group activities to explore ways to promote adaptive coping with patients to improve health outcomes. Learners participated in a mindfulness exercise, conceptualized coping strategies given a hypothetical case scenario, and, in small groups, role-played a patient encounter to construct an effective coping repertoire for the patient. Participants completed a prework self-assessment and workshop evaluation form.

RESULTS

The 2.5-hour workshop had 48 participants from five professions (medicine, education, physician assistant, pharmacology, psychology). We received 35 evaluations (73% response rate). Learners reported increased real-world skills (M = 8.0 out of 10) and feeling better prepared for working in interprofessional settings (M = 7.6 out of 10). Qualitative feedback suggested that participants recognized the importance of individual differences in coping with stress and felt they could categorize strategies into emotion- or problem-focused coping.

DISCUSSION

This workshop provided participants with basic knowledge about the social-cognitive model of stress and coping and allowed them to practice newly learned skills in a role-play as an interprofessional medical care team.