"It's so hard taking pills when you don't know what they're for": a qualitative study of patients' medicine taking behaviours and conceptualisation of medicines in the context of rheumatoid arthritis

Candidacy 2.0 (CC) - an enhanced theory of access to healthcare for chronic conditions: lessons from a critical interpretive synthesis on access to rheumatoid arthritis care

BACKGROUND

The Dixon-Woods et al. Candidacy Framework, a valuable tool since its 2006 introduction, has been widely utilized to analyze access to various services in diverse contexts, including healthcare. This social constructionist approach examines micro, meso, and macro influences on access, offering concrete explanations for access challenges rooted in socially patterned influences. This study employed the Candidacy Framework to explore the experiences of individuals living with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and their formal care providers. The investigation extended to assessing supports and innovations in RA diagnosis and management, particularly in primary care.

METHODS

This systematic review is a Critical Interpretive Synthesis (CIS) of qualitative and mixed methods literature. The CIS aimed to generate theory from identified constructs across the reviewed literature. The study found alignment between the seven dimensions of the Candidacy Framework and key themes emerging from the data. Notably absent from the framework was an eighth dimension, identified as the "embodied relational self." This dimension, central to the model, prompted the proposal of a revised framework specific to healthcare for chronic conditions.

RESULTS

The CIS revealed that the eight dimensions, including the embodied relational self, provided a comprehensive understanding of the experiences and perspectives of individuals with RA and their care providers. The proposed Candidacy 2.0 (Chronic Condition (CC)) model demonstrated how integrating approaches like Intersectionality, concordance, and recursivity enhanced the framework when the embodied self was central.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concludes that while the original Candidacy Framework serves as a robust foundation, a revised version, Candidacy 2.0 (CC), is warranted for chronic conditions. The addition of the embodied relational self dimension enriches the model, accommodating the complexities of accessing healthcare for chronic conditions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study did not involve a health care intervention on human participants, and as such, trial registration is not applicable. However, our review is registered with the Open Science Framework at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ASX5C .

Outcomes of Community Pharmacy Interventions on Patients with Medicines Under Additional Monitoring

Purpose

Additional monitoring (AM) medicines include (i) medicines containing a new active substance; (ii) biological medicines; (iii) medicines with conditional approval or authorized in special situations; (iv) medicines which require further studies; (v) medicines that have specific requirements regarding the reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs). When AM medicines are marketed, their most common ADRs are known, but safety information is limited because relatively rare ADRs are often not detected in clinical trials. Their AM status warrants real-world studies to identify other safety issues; however, such studies are lacking. Correct use and adherence to dosage regimen by patients are key factors for the evaluation of the safety and efficacy of medicines. The objective of this work was assessing the impact on safety, adherence, use and knowledge (U&K) about medicines and patient's quality of life (QOL), of community pharmacist (CP)-led interventions in a new service focused on AM medicines targeted at three prevalent chronic diseases: diabetes mellitus type 2, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cardiovascular disease.

Patients and Methods

A prospective interventional cohort study was conducted with a 6-month follow-up in 27 community pharmacies (145 patients). Safety, adherence to treatment, patient U&K and QOL were assessed at follow-up visits (months 0, 3 and 6).

Results

The number of detected ADRs was 163 with 41 patients referred to the doctor. At baseline, 24.1% of the patients were non-adherent, mainly due to unintentional causes. After six months and 130 interventions by CPs on adherence, a significant reduction to lower than 5.8% was achieved. The inadequate U&K of medicines also decreased, from 47.6% to 7.9% after 182 interventions. Also, the patient's QOL improved.

Conclusion

A new patient-centered pharmacy service provides some evidence on the important role of CP in assisting the proper and safe use of AM medicines, improving patient health outcomes.

Patient-reported outcome measures for medication-related quality of life: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Medication use is common for the prevention and treatment of many health conditions. Understanding the impact of medication-taking on quality of life is important, as it could contribute to better care plans and improve shared decision-making between patients and healthcare providers.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically identify and summarize the extent of literature on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for medication-related quality of life (QoL).

METHODS

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Health and Psychosocial Instruments databases were searched until May 17, 2021 for peer-reviewed, original research articles that included a PROM for medication-related QoL and reported its psychometric properties. Study selection were completed by pairs with a third reviewer resolving any conflicts. Data were extracted by the study team using a form in Microsoft Excel. Extracted data were summarized descriptively and tabulated numerically.

RESULTS

We screened 8,878 records, including 170 full-text articles, of which 86 met the criteria for inclusion. We identified 80 unique PROMs. Over half (n = 53) described measuring treatment satisfaction and less than one quarter measured medication related-QoL more broadly. Most of the included PROMs were targeted towards populations with specific health conditions including cancer (n = 9) and diabetes (n = 8), as well as individuals taking medication for non-specific conditions (n = 7). The most reported psychometric properties were internal consistency (n = 75) and construct validity (n = 77). All PROMs but one (n = 79) assessed physical health but fewer assessed other QoL dimensions (e.g., autonomy, interactions with providers).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the PROMs were designed for condition-specific or medication-specific populations, with few for general medication-related QoL. Future research should focus on assessing medication-related QoL measures for broader populations such as those with disabilities, multimorbidity, or experiencing polypharmacy. There needs to be more guidance on how to implement the use of PROMs in clinical settings, as well as to ensure consistency around terminology related to QoL.

Factors Contributing to Medication Adherence in Patients with a Chronic Condition: A Scoping Review of Qualitative Research

INTRODUCTION

Medication adherence continues to be a significant challenge in healthcare, and there is a shortage of effective interventions in this area. This scoping review studied the patient-related factors of medication adherence.

METHODS

We searched Medline Ovid, Scopus, and Cochrane Library from January 2009 to June 2021 to find the most recent original qualitative studies or systematic reviews that addressed the patient-related factors of medication adherence in treating chronic conditions. We used the PRISMA-ScR checklist to ensure the quality of the study.

RESULTS

The initial search revealed 4404 studies, of which we included 89 qualitative studies in the scoping review. We inductively organized the patient-related factors causing barriers, as well as the facilitators to medication adherence. The studies more often dealt with barriers than facilitators. We classified the factors as patient-specific, illness-specific, medication-related, healthcare and system-related, sociocultural, as well as logistical and financial factors. Information and knowledge of diseases and their treatment, communication, trust in patient-provider relationships, support, and adequate resources appeared to be the critical facilitators in medication adherence from the patient perspective.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Patients are willing to discuss their concerns about medications. Better communication and better information on medicines appear to be among the critical factors for patients. The findings of this scoping review may help those who plan further interventions to improve medication adherence.

Exploring medication self-management in community-dwelling adults with chronic medication experience: A concept mapping study

BACKGROUND

People who take medications often experience challenges including making decisions about risks versus benefits and integrating medication management with all aspects of life (e.g., social and work responsibilities). Existing medication self-management frameworks are primarily adherence-focused and lack integrating holistic perspectives.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the priorities of people with chronic medication experience (i.e., take at least 1 medication daily for at least 3 months) and what they can contribute to the understanding of medication self-management.

METHODS

Concept mapping is a participatory, mixed-methods approach with 3 stages: brainstorming, sorting/rating, and mapping. Group brainstorming discussions were held with participants who generated statements about what mattered to them regarding medications in their everyday lives. In sorting/rating, individual participants grouped statements into thematic piles and rated their importance and feasibility. During mapping, a subset of participants discussed and agreed on a visual map and named the statement clusters. Following mapping, the researchers analyzed rating results, stratified by participant characteristics (gender, age, duration of medication use, number of medications, and chronic conditions).

RESULTS

Sixty-three participants generated 1044 statements during 8 brainstorming sessions, which the researchers synthesized into 94 statements. Fifty-four participants individually sorted and rated the statements. Most statements were rated highly on both importance and feasibility, regardless of participant characteristics. Eight participants attended the mapping session. The final map had 9 thematic clusters, which were named by participants as: 1) researching and becoming educated about medications; 2) social support; 3) effectiveness of medication; 4) self-ownership of medication; 5) ease of use; 6) convenience and accessibility; 7) information provided by healthcare provider; 8) personal interactions with healthcare provider; and 9) patient involvement and trust.

CONCLUSIONS

Results enhance existing medication management frameworks by providing a more comprehensive perspective. Understanding medication self-management requires more research that incorporates and prioritizes the perspectives of individuals who manage their medications.

Qualitative validation of audiovisual educational material for use on rheumatoid arthritis patients

Medication compliance is critical to achieve therapeutic efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis; however, among other factors, low patient-health literacy plays a negative role. Therefore, the development and validation of audiovisual educational material with the participation of health specialists and patients could lead to an improved level of compliance with treatment, while favoring its acceptance. To design and validate audiovisual educational material generated by a multidisciplinary and participative group of patients and health specialists. This study was carried out using a sequential methodology, including qualitative and quantitative techniques: (1) a non-participative observational study with patients and a non-systematic literature search were performed to identify conceptual topics. (2) Pilot videos were qualitatively assessed by patients and health specialists (focus groups and expert committees). (3) Improved versions of seven videos were quantitatively evaluated by patients and specialists following qualitative criteria of attraction, understanding, involvement, acceptance and induction of action. 74 patients with RA, 10 rheumatologists, 4 pharmacists and 2 medical anthropologists participated in the different phases of validation. A total of seven videos lasting 3 min each were generated, incorporating the most relevant suggestions by patients and healthcare professionals. The final version of the videos led to a mean compliance of 96.04 ± 5.2%, according to a representative group of patients and a mean 89.6 ± 9.4%, according to health professionals. With the participation of both patients and health specialists, seven audiovisual educational video recordings were developed and validated, reaching high levels of compliance in accordance with international criteria.

Communicative and Discursive Perspectives on the Medication Experience

Taking the ‘medication experience’ in the broad sense of what individuals hear and say about their medication, as well as how they experience it, this paper explores diverse research on medication information available to patients and their modes and capacities for interaction, including personal circles, doctors and pharmacists, labeling and promotion, websites, and the patient’s own inner conversations and self-expression. The goal is to illustrate, for nonspecialists in communication, how the actors, messages, mediums, genres, and contextual factors within a standard ethnographic and social semiotic model of discourse and communication are operating, not always effectively or beneficially, to mediate or construct a patient’s medication experience. We also suggest how disparate insights can be integrated through such a model and might generate new research questions.

How do I keep myself safe? Patient perspectives on including reason for use information on prescriptions and medication labels: a qualitative thematic analysis

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND

Medications are crucial for maintaining patient wellness and improving health in modern medicine, but their use comes with risks. Helping patients to understand why they are taking medications is important for patient-centered care and facilitates patient adherence to prescribed medications. One strategy involves enhancing communication between patients, physicians, and pharmacists through the sharing of reason for use (RFU) information or the indication for medications.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 patients in Ontario, Canada, to gain perspectives on how patients currently store their medication information and benefits and disadvantages of adding RFU to prescriptions and medication labels. An interview guide was used by the two interviewers, and the interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically coded.

RESULTS

The analysis yielded three main themes: patient decision making with RFU, RFU in modern, patient-centered care, and logistical aspects of communicating RFU. The patients that were interviewed expressed the value of having RFU when deciding if a medication was effective or to stop taking the medication. Patients felt comfortable with RFU being added to prescriptions and acknowledged the value in adding RFU to medication labels, helping patients and others identify and distinguish medications. Patients generally expressed interest in having RFU written in lay language and identified strengths and weaknesses of having access to RFU via a website or app.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients rated the importance of knowing RFU very highly, identified the value in sharing RFU with pharmacists on prescriptions, and in having RFU on medication labels. These results can be used to inform policy on the addition of RFU on prescriptions and medication labels and support improved communication between patients, pharmacists, and physicians about RFU.

Disease and management beliefs of elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis and comorbidity: a qualitative study

To explore in elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and comorbidity (1) in which order and why patients prioritize their morbidities with regard to functioning and health, (2) their beliefs about common (age-related) musculoskeletal complaints, and (3) experiences about the influence of comorbidity on medication treatment of RA. Patients between 50 and 85 years with RA and ≥ 1 comorbidity or lifestyle risk factor were invited for a semi-structured interview. Two readers coded the transcripts of the interviews, by using NVivo11 software. Fifteen patients (14 women; mean age 67 years (range 51-83 years); mean disease duration 14 years (range 1-39 years)) were interviewed. Only 3 (20%) out of 15 patients prioritized RA over their comorbidity; these patients often experienced severe functional limitations. The level of current or (perceived) future disability, risk of dependency, and the perceived lethality of a condition were considered by participants when prioritizing morbidities. Most participants had misconceptions about common age-related musculoskeletal complaints. Consequently, these participants attributed all joint complaints or even all physical complaints to RA, disregarding degenerative joint disease and physiological aging as alternative diagnoses. Half of the participants ever had to change RA medication because of comorbidity. Most of these patients had prioritized the comorbidity, sometimes even over treatment of RA disease activity. Most elderly RA patients with comorbidity prioritize the importance and treatment of comorbidity over RA. Better understanding of patients' beliefs on RA and comorbidity is essential when managing chronic conditions in elderly patients.

Expert recommendations on the psychological needs of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To establish feasible and practical recommendations for the management of the psychological needs of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the moment of diagnosis through the course of the disease.

METHODS

A nominal group meeting was held with an RA expert team including rheumatologists and psychologists, at which a guided discussion addressed the most important psychological and emotional needs in RA. Based on the comments collected, and a literature review, a matrix document of recommendations for telematics discussion was prepared, as well as a Delphi survey to test agreement with these recommendations. Agreement was defined if at least 80% of participants voted ≥ 7 (from 1, totally disagree to 10, totally agree). For each recommendation, the level of evidence and grading of recommendations was established following the Oxford criteria, and the degree of agreement through the Delphi.

RESULTS

Thirteen recommendations were established, addressing several key processes: (1) identification of psychological problems and needs in patients with RA, and a guideline for their management in daily practice; (2) communication with patients; (3) referral criteria to mental health professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations are intended to help health care professionals openly address the psychological aspects of patients in daily practice to follow and treat them properly.