Intervention to enhance communication about newly prescribed medications

Training physicians in providing complex information to patients with multiple sclerosis: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of a specific communication training for neurologists on how to provide complex information about treatment options to patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).

DESIGN

Single-centre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

One university hospital in Norway.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-four patients with early-stage MS.

INTERVENTION

A 3-hour training for neurologists on how to provide complex information about MS escalation therapy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient recall rate, measured with a reliable counting system of provided and recalled information about drugs.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Number of information units provided by the physicians. Effects on patient involvement through questionnaires.

METHODS

Patients with MS were instructed to imagine a disease development and were randomised and blinded to meet a physician to receive information on escalation therapy, before or after the physician had participated in a 3-hour training on how to provide complex information. Consultations and immediate patient recall interviews were video-recorded and transcribed verbatim.

RESULTS

Patient recall rate was 0.37 (SD=0.10) pre-intervention and 0.39 (SD=0.10) post-intervention. The effect of the intervention on recall rate predicted with a general linear model covariate was not significant (coefficient parameter 0.07 (SE 0.04, 95% CI (-0.01 to 0.15)), p=0.099).The physicians tended to provide significantly fewer information units after the training, with an average of 91.0 (SD=30.3) pre-intervention and 76.5 (SD=17.4) post-intervention; coefficient parameter -0.09 (SE 0.02, 95% CI (-0.13 to -0.05)), p<0.001. There was a significant negative association between the amount of provided information and the recall rate (coefficient parameter -0.29 (SE 0.05, 95% CI (-0.39 to -0.18)), p<0.001). We found no significant effects on patient involvement using the Control Preference Scale, Collaborate or Four Habits Patient Questionnaire.

CONCLUSION

A brief course for physicians on providing complex information reduced the amount of information provided, but did not improve patient recall rate.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN42739508.

Post-Visit Patient Understanding About Newly Prescribed Medications

BACKGROUND

Good patient understanding of basic medication-related information such as directions for use and side effects promotes medication adherence, but information is lacking about how well patients understand basic medication-related information after their office visits.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to investigate post-visit patient understanding about newly prescribed medications.

DESIGN

Secondary mixed methods analysis comparing patient survey responses about newly prescribed medications to information conveyed by physicians during office visits (from audio recordings of office visits).

PARTICIPANTS

Eighty-one patients aged 50 and older who discussed newly prescribed medications during an outpatient office visit.

MAIN MEASURES

Accurate patient identification of medication dose, number of pills, frequency of use, duration of use, and potential side effects.

KEY RESULTS

The 81 patients in this study received 111 newly prescribed medications. For over 70% of all newly prescribed medications, patients correctly identified the number of pills, frequency of use, duration of use, and dose, regardless of whether the physician mentioned the information during the office visit. However, for 34 of 62 medications (55%) for which side effects were not conveyed and 11 of 49 medications (22%) for which physicians discussed side effects, patients reported that the medication lacked side effects. Analysis of transcribed office visits showed that potential reasons for this finding included failure of physicians to mention or to use the term "side effects" during visits, the prescription of multiple medications during the visit, and lack of patient engagement in the conversation.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients correctly identified information related to directions for taking a newly prescribed medication, even without physician counseling, but when physicians failed to convey potential medication side effects, many assumed that a medication had no side effects. It may be sufficient for physicians to provide written information about medication directions and dosing, and tailor their limited time to discussing medication side effects.

Aspects of Medication and Patient participation-an Easy guideLine (AMPEL). A conversation guide increases patients' and physicians' satisfaction with prescription talks

Patients want more information and active participation in medical decisions. Information and active participation correlate with increased adherence. A conversation guide, combining patient-relevant drug information with steps of shared decision-making, was developed to support physicians in effective and efficient prescription talks. Six GP trainees in community-based primary care practices participated in a controlled pilot study in sequential pre-post design. Initially, they conducted 41 prescription talks as usual, i.e., without knowing the guide. Then, they conducted 23 talks considering the guide (post-intervention phase). Immediately after the respective talk, patients filled in a questionnaire on satisfaction with the information on medication and physician–patient interaction, and physicians about their satisfaction with the talk and the application of the guide. Patients felt better informed after guide-based prescription talks (e.g., SIMS-D in median 10 vs. 17, p < 0.05), more actively involved (KPF-A for patient activation 2.9 ± 0.8 vs. 3.6 ± 0.8, p < 0.05), and more satisfied with the physician–patient interaction. Physicians rated the guide helpful and feasible. Their satisfaction with the conversation was significantly enhanced during the post-intervention phase. The evaluation of the duration of the talk was not influenced. Enhanced patients’ and physicians’ satisfaction with prescription talks encourages further examinations of the conversation guide. We invite physicians to try our guide in everyday medical practice.

Development and Initial Validation of the Communication About Medication by Providers-Parent Scale (CAMP-P)

This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Communication about Medication by Providers-Parent Scale (CAMP-P), a 24-item measure of communication relevant to medication adherence between parents and medical providers. Parents of youth (ages 2-7 years) who had received a prescription within the last 12 months completed online surveys regarding demographic and appointment variables, and child's recent prescription medications, and they completed the newly developed CAMP-P. Exploratory factor analysis of CAMP-P identified 20 items about provider communication corresponding to 3 distinct scales: medication administration strategies, encouraging communication, and addressing barriers to medication taking. Factor scales were related to appointment variables, such as length of time spent discussing medications. The CAMP-P demonstrated good internal consistency and convergent and divergent validity. The CAMP-P is a novel, validated measure of parent perceptions of medication communication and can be utilized to evaluate parent-provider communication on pediatric medication adherence in clinical and research settings.

Efficiency, Efficacy, and Power in the Implementation of a Medication Adherence Aid

Nonadherence to medication regimens is common, with approximately 50% of patients not taking their medications as prescribed. The Universal Medication Schedule (UMS) is a set of standardized, evidence-based, and patient-centered instructions for pill-form medications that has demonstrated improvements in adherence by promoting patient comprehension. An urban, publicly funded, integrated health care system attempted to adopt UMS labeling but had limited success at its largest pilot site, which was a safety-net health care system's outpatient pharmacy. To assess barriers to implementation, we engaged pharmacists at this site in group interviews. We thematically analyzed transcripts by integrating sociological work on standardization with grounded theory methodologies. In addition to lacking technological infrastructure, tensions among efficiency, efficacy, and effectiveness, and tension between individual/biomedical versus population health perspectives emerged as barriers to implementation. Additionally, we discovered that hierarchies of professional power impeded uptake. For successful implementation of evidence-based practices for vulnerable populations in resource-poor settings, efforts must anticipate and reconcile the tensions among conflicting demands, professional hierarchies, and divergent orientations to patient care. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2018;2(3):e128-e131.].

Conceptual models to guide integration during analysis in convergent mixed methods studies

Methodologists have offered general strategies for integration in mixed-methods studies through merging of quantitative and qualitative data. While these strategies provide researchers in the field general guidance on how to integrate data during mixed-methods analysis, a methodological typology detailing specific analytic frameworks has been lacking. The purpose of this article is to introduce a typology of analytical approaches for mixed-methods data integration in mixed-methods convergent studies. We distinguish three dimensions of data merging analytics: (1) the relational dimension, (2) the methodological dimension, and (3) the directional dimension. Five different frameworks for data merging relative to the methodological and directional dimension in convergent mixed-methods studies are described: (1) the explanatory unidirectional approach, (2) the exploratory unidirectional approach, (3) the simultaneous bidirectional approach, (4) the explanatory bidirectional approach, and (5) the exploratory bidirectional approach. Examples from empirical studies are used to illustrate each type. Researchers can use this typology to inform and articulate their analytical approach during the design, implementation, and reporting phases to convey clearly how an integrated approach to data merging occurred.

Current and future perspectives on the management of polypharmacy

BACKGROUND

Because of ageing populations, the growth in the number of people with multi-morbidity and greater compliance with disease-specific guidelines, polypharmacy is becoming increasingly common. Although the correct drug treatment in patients with complex medical problems can improve clinical outcomes, quality of life and life expectancy, polypharmacy is also associated with an increased risk of adverse drug events, some severe enough to result in hospital admission and even death. Hence, having systems in place to ensure that medications are started only when there is a suitable indication, ensuring patients are fully aware of the benefits and complications that may arise from their treatment, and reviewing patients regularly to ensure their medication regime remains appropriate, are essential.

DISCUSSION

The development and rapid uptake of electronic patient records - particularly in primary care settings where the majority of prescribing takes place - makes monitoring of patients more straightforward than in the past; and allows identification of sub-groups of patients at particularly high risk of adverse drug events and complications. It also facilitates 'deprescribing' the process by which medications are reviewed and stopped if not clinically beneficial. In recent years, we have also seen the development of smartphone 'apps' to improve communication between patients and healthcare professionals, improve people's understanding of their conditions and their treatment, and maintain a record of changes made to patient's medication. In the longer term, developments such as the introduction of artificial intelligence and clinical decision support systems also have the potential to improve prescribing and minimise the risks from polypharmacy. Finally, there is considerable scope to improve the quality of prescribing and reduce risks from poly-pharmacy using non-medical groups such as pharmacists, specialist nurses and physician assistants. Polypharmacy has increased in recent decades and will continue to increase as populations age and the number of people with multiple long-term conditions increases. As with all areas of medicine, the evidence-base in this area continues to evolve. Further trials on the impact on patients with polypharmacy of new interventions such as technology-based solutions and the use of different professional groups are needed to improve the evidence-base in this area.

A microanalysis of the clarity of information in physicians' and patients' discussions of treatment plans with and without language barriers

OBJECTIVE

Physicians and patients discuss treatment plans. If tasks within plans are not described adequately, patients cannot adhere. We evaluated task descriptions, testing whether patient engagement and language barriers affected task clarity.

METHOD

We sampled 12 videotaped hospital interactions from a corpus of 497: two encounters each from six hospital physicians, interacting with one native-speaking and one non-native-speaking patient. We used microanalysis of face-to-face dialogue to assess whether the physicians and patients achieved a complete, clear description of each task's three core information elements (who should do what and when).

RESULTS

We conducted detailed analysis on 78 of the 90 tasks. Core information elements were complete in 62 (0.79) and clear in 37 (0.47). Language barriers had no effect on task clarity. When native-speaking patients were engaged, tasks were clearer (p<0.05). Although non-native-speaking patients were significantly more engaged (p<0.01), their engagement had no effect.

CONCLUSION

Physicians may be pursuing patients' agreement, motivation, and commitment at the expense of working with the patient to be clear about what needs to be done.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physicians need to improve how clearly they present basic task information. Previous research demonstrated that even a short course can significantly improve the clarity of instructions.

Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Results in Health Science Mixed Methods Research Through Joint Displays

PURPOSE

Mixed methods research is becoming an important methodology to investigate complex health-related topics, yet the meaningful integration of qualitative and quantitative data remains elusive and needs further development. A promising innovation to facilitate integration is the use of visual joint displays that bring data together visually to draw out new insights. The purpose of this study was to identify exemplar joint displays by analyzing the various types of joint displays being used in published articles.

METHODS

We searched for empirical articles that included joint displays in 3 journals that publish state-of-the-art mixed methods research. We analyzed each of 19 identified joint displays to extract the type of display, mixed methods design, purpose, rationale, qualitative and quantitative data sources, integration approaches, and analytic strategies. Our analysis focused on what each display communicated and its representation of mixed methods analysis.

RESULTS

The most prevalent types of joint displays were statistics-by-themes and side-by-side comparisons. Innovative joint displays connected findings to theoretical frameworks or recommendations. Researchers used joint displays for convergent, explanatory sequential, exploratory sequential, and intervention designs. We identified exemplars for each of these designs by analyzing the inferences gained through using the joint display. Exemplars represented mixed methods integration, presented integrated results, and yielded new insights.

CONCLUSIONS

Joint displays appear to provide a structure to discuss the integrated analysis and assist both researchers and readers in understanding how mixed methods provides new insights. We encourage researchers to use joint displays to integrate and represent mixed methods analysis and discuss their value.

Improving Patient Outcomes: Effectively Training Healthcare Staff in Psychological Practice Skills: A Mixed Systematic Literature Review

Training is an important part of modern European healthcare services and is often cited as a way to improve care quality. To date, various training methods have been used to impart skills relevant to psychological practice in a variety of mental health professionals. However, patient outcomes are rarely used in evaluating the effectiveness of the different training methods used, making it difficult to assess true utility. In the present review, we consider methods of training that can effectively impact trainee and patient outcomes. To do so, PubMed, PsycNET, Scopus, CENTRAL and ERIC were searched for studies on training of healthcare staff in psychological practice approaches. In total, 24 studies were identified (16 quantitative and 8 qualitative). For the most part, group, individual, and web-based training was used. A variety of health professionals were trained in skills including ‘communication’, ‘diagnosis’, and ‘referral’ to name but a few. In the majority of studies staff skill level improved. These findings hold implications for the design, implementation, and evaluation of training for mental healthcare staff.

Refining the Practice of Prescribing: Teaching Physician Learners How to Talk to Patients About a New Prescription

BACKGROUND

Clinician counseling about medication can improve patient understanding and adherence. This study developed a teaching session for physician learners about medication prescribing and communication, with evaluation at the physician and patient levels.

OBJECTIVE

We analyzed whether patients would perceive and report more comprehensive clinician presentation of medication information when receiving prescriptions from their physician in the intervention clinic.

METHODS

We conducted a single site, prospective intervention study that included lectures, role play, an objective standardized clinical examination (OSCE), and reminders displayed in patient care areas. For physician-level assessment, pretests and posttests included a written case presentation and a OSCE. For patient-level assessment, we used a cross-sectional observational design that included study of patient recall information, and assessment of patient satisfaction before and after intervention.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven family medicine residents and sports medicine fellows participated in the teaching session, focused on presenting patients the reasons, risks, and regimen of prescribed medication. In written testing, learners presented significantly more comprehensive information in posttests. In the OSCE (n  =  14), all learners presented risks and regimen information. However, patient-level assessment showed no significant difference between before and after intervention. Notably, the covariates patient activation and satisfaction with communication both had a significant association with patient recall information.

CONCLUSIONS

Our intervention improved learner presentation of medication information. However, patient recall of the information conveyed did not change. Although physician training did not have a positive effect on patient recall, patient activation emerged as a critical influence of patients' perceptions of medication discussions.

A matter of trust: patient barriers to primary medication adherence

Primary medication adherence occurs when a patient properly fills the first prescription for a new medication. Primary adherence only occurs about three-quarters of the time for antihypertensive medications. We assessed patients' barriers to primary adherence and attributes of patient-provider discussions that might improve primary adherence for antihypertensives. In total, 26 patients with incomplete primary adherence for an antihypertensive, identified using their retail pharmacy claims, participated in four focus groups. Following a moderators' guide developed a priori, moderators led patients in a discussion of patients' attitudes and experiences with hypertension and receiving an antihypertensive medication, barriers to primary adherence, and their preferences for shared decision making and communication with providers. Three authors analysed and organized data into salient themes, including patients' anger about and suspicion of their hypertension diagnosis, the need for medication and providers' credibility. A trusting patient-provider relationship, shared decision-making support, full disclosure of side effects and cost sensitivity were attributes that might enhance primary adherence. Developing decision support interventions that strengthen the patient-provider relationship by enhancing provider credibility and patient trust prior to prescribing may provide more effective approaches for improving primary adherence.

Physician-patient communication about dietary supplements

OBJECTIVE

Describe the content and frequency of provider-patient dietary supplement discussions during primary care office visits.

METHODS

Inductive content analysis of 1477 transcribed audio-recorded office visits to 102 primary care providers was combined with patient and provider surveys. Encounters were collected in Los Angeles, CA (2009-2010), geographically diverse practice settings across the United States (2004-2005), and Sacramento, CA (1998-1999).

RESULTS

Providers discussed 738 dietary supplements during encounters with 357 patients (24.2% of all encounters in the data). They mentioned: (1) reason for taking the supplement for 46.5% of dietary supplements; (2) how to take the supplement for 28.2%; (3) potential risks for 17.3%; (4) supplement effectiveness for 16.7%; and (5) supplement cost or affordability for 4.2%. Of these five topics, a mean of 1.13 (SD=1.2) topics were discussed for each supplement. More topics were reviewed for non-vitamin non-mineral supplements (mean 1.47 (SD=1.2)) than for vitamin/mineral supplements (mean 0.99 (SD=1.1); p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

While discussions about supplements are occurring, it is clear that more discussion might be needed to inform patient decisions about supplement use.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physicians could more frequently address topics that may influence patient dietary supplement use, such as the risks, effectiveness, and costs of supplements.