What affected UK adults' adherence to medicines during the COVID-19 pandemic? Cross-sectional survey in a representative sample of people with long-term conditions

Aim

Medicines non-adherence is associated with poorer outcomes and higher costs. COVID-19 affected access to healthcare, with increased reliance on remote methods, including medicines supply. This study aimed to identify what affected people's adherence to medicines for long-term conditions (LTCs) during the pandemic.

Subject and methods

Cross-sectional online survey of UK adults prescribed medicines for LTCs assessing self-reported medicines adherence, reasons for non-adherence (using the capability, opportunity and motivation model of behaviour [COM-B]), medicines access and COVID-19-related behaviours.

Results

The 1746 respondents reported a mean (SD) of 2.5 (1.9) LTCs, for which they were taking 2.4 (1.9) prescribed medicines, 525 (30.1%) reported using digital tools to support ordering or taking medicines and 22.6% reported medicines non-adherence. No access to at least one medicine was reported by 182 (10.4%) respondents; 1048 (60.0%) reported taking at least one non-prescription medicine as a substitute; 409 (23.4%) requested emergency supply from pharmacy for at least one medicine. Problems accessing medicines, being younger, male, in the highest socioeconomic group and working were linked to poorer adherence. Access problems were mostly directly or indirectly related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents were generally lacking in capabilities and opportunities, but disruptions to habits (automatic motivation) was the major reason for non-adherence.

Conclusion

Navigating changes in how medicines were accessed, and disruption of habits during the COVID-19 pandemic, was associated with suboptimal adherence. People were resourceful in overcoming barriers to access. Solutions to support medicines-taking need to take account of the multiple ways that medicines are prescribed and supplied remotely.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-022-01813-0.

Investigating the association between COVID-19 vaccination and care home outbreak frequency and duration

OBJECTIVES

At the end of 2020, many countries commenced a vaccination programme against SARS-CoV-2. Public health authorities aim to prevent and interrupt outbreaks of infectious disease in social care settings. We aimed to investigate the association between the introduction of the vaccination programme and the frequency and duration of COVID-19 outbreaks in Northern Ireland (NI).

STUDY DESIGN

We undertook an ecological study using routinely available national data.

METHODS

We used Poisson regression to measure the relationship between the number of RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 outbreaks in care homes, and as a measure of community COVID-19 prevalence, the Office for National Statistics COVID-19 Infection Survey estimated the number of people testing positive for COVID-19 in NI. We estimated the change in this relationship and estimated the expected number of care home outbreaks in the absence of the vaccination programme. A Cox proportional hazards model estimated the hazard ratio of a confirmed COVID-19 care home outbreak closure.

RESULTS

Care home outbreaks reduced by two-thirds compared to expected following the introduction of the vaccination programme, from a projected 1625 COVID-19 outbreaks (95% prediction interval 1553-1694) between 7 December 2020 and 28 October 2021 to an observed 501. We estimated an adjusted hazard ratio of 2.53 of the outbreak closure assuming a 21-day lag for immunity.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings describe the association of the vaccination with a reduction in outbreak frequency and duration across NI care homes. This indicates probable reduced harm and disruption from COVID-19 in social care settings following vaccination. Future research using individual level data from care home residents will be needed to investigate the effectiveness of the vaccines and the duration of their effects.

First-dose ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccines and thrombocytopenic, thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events in Scotland

Reports of ChAdOx1 vaccine-associated thrombocytopenia and vascular adverse events have led to some countries restricting its use. Using a national prospective cohort, we estimated associations between exposure to first-dose ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2 vaccination and hematological and vascular adverse events using a nested incident-matched case-control study and a confirmatory self-controlled case series (SCCS) analysis. An association was found between ChAdOx1 vaccination and idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) (0-27 d after vaccination; adjusted rate ratio (aRR) = 5.77, 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.41-13.83), with an estimated incidence of 1.13 (0.62-1.63) cases per 100,000 doses. An SCCS analysis confirmed that this was unlikely due to bias (RR = 1.98 (1.29-3.02)). There was also an increased risk for arterial thromboembolic events (aRR = 1.22, 1.12-1.34) 0-27 d after vaccination, with an SCCS RR of 0.97 (0.93-1.02). For hemorrhagic events 0-27 d after vaccination, the aRR was 1.48 (1.12-1.96), with an SCCS RR of 0.95 (0.82-1.11). A first dose of ChAdOx1 was found to be associated with small increased risks of ITP, with suggestive evidence of an increased risk of arterial thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events. The attenuation of effect found in the SCCS analysis means that there is the potential for overestimation of the reported results, which might indicate the presence of some residual confounding or confounding by indication. Public health authorities should inform their jurisdictions of these relatively small increased risks associated with ChAdOx1. No positive associations were seen between BNT162b2 and thrombocytopenic, thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events.