Measuring adherence to inhaled control medication in patients with asthma: Comparison among an asthma app, patient self-report and physician assessment

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated the feasibility of using an asthma app to support medication management and adherence but failed to compare with other measures currently used in clinical practice. However, in a clinical setting, any additional adherence measurement must be evaluated in the context of both the patient and physician perspectives so that it can also help improve the process of shared decision making. Thus, we aimed to compare different measures of adherence to asthma control inhalers in clinical practice, namely through an app, patient self-report and physician assessment.

METHODS

This study is a secondary analysis of three prospective multicentre observational studies with patients (≥13 years old) with persistent asthma recruited from 61 primary and secondary care centres in Portugal. Patients were invited to use the InspirerMundi app and register their inhaled medication. Adherence was measured by the app as the number of doses taken divided by the number of doses scheduled each day and two time points were considered for analysis: 1-week and 1-month. At baseline, patients and physicians independently assessed adherence to asthma control inhalers during the previous week using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS 0-100).

RESULTS

A total of 193 patients (72% female; median [P25-P75] age 28 [19-41] years old) were included in the analysis. Adherence measured by the app was lower (1 week: 31 [0-71]%; 1 month: 18 [0-48]%) than patient self-report (80 [60-95]) and physician assessment (82 [51-94]) (p < 0.001). A negligible non-significant correlation was found between the app and subjective measurements (ρ 0.118-0.156, p > 0.05). There was a moderate correlation between patient self-report and physician assessment (ρ = 0.596, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence measured by the app was lower than that reported by the patient or the physician. This was expected as objective measurements are commonly lower than subjective evaluations, which tend to overestimate adherence. Nevertheless, the low adherence measured by the app may also be influenced by the use of the app itself and this needs to be considered in future studies.

Determinants of the Use of Health and Fitness Mobile Apps by Patients With Asthma: Secondary Analysis of Observational Studies

Background

Health and fitness apps have potential benefits to improve self-management and disease control among patients with asthma. However, inconsistent use rates have been reported across studies, regions, and health systems. A better understanding of the characteristics of users and nonusers is critical to design solutions that are effectively integrated in patients’ daily lives, and to ensure that these equitably reach out to different groups of patients, thus improving rather than entrenching health inequities.

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the use of general health and fitness apps by patients with asthma and to identify determinants of usage.

Methods

A secondary analysis of the INSPIRERS observational studies was conducted using data from face-to-face visits. Patients with a diagnosis of asthma were included between November 2017 and August 2020. Individual-level data were collected, including age, gender, marital status, educational level, health status, presence of anxiety and depression, postcode, socioeconomic level, digital literacy, use of health services, and use of health and fitness apps. Multivariate logistic regression was used to model the probability of being a health and fitness app user. Statistical analysis was performed in R.

Results

A total of 526 patients attended a face-to-face visit in the 49 recruiting centers and 514 had complete data. Most participants were ≤40 years old (66.4%), had at least 10 years of education (57.4%), and were in the 3 higher quintiles of the socioeconomic deprivation index (70.1%). The majority reported an overall good health status (visual analogue scale [VAS] score>70 in 93.1%) and the prevalence of anxiety and depression was 34.3% and 11.9%, respectively. The proportion of participants who reported using health and fitness mobile apps was 41.1% (n=211). Multivariate models revealed that single individuals and those with more than 10 years of education are more likely to use health and fitness mobile apps (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.22, 95%CI 1.05-4.75 and aOR 1.95, 95%CI 1.12-3.45, respectively). Higher digital literacy scores were also associated with higher odds of being a user of health and fitness apps, with participants in the second, third, and fourth quartiles reporting aORs of 6.74 (95%CI 2.90-17.40), 10.30 (95%CI 4.28-27.56), and 11.52 (95%CI 4.78-30.87), respectively. Participants with depression symptoms had lower odds of using health and fitness apps (aOR 0.32, 95%CI 0.12-0.83).

Conclusions

A better understanding of the barriers and enhancers of app use among patients with lower education, lower digital literacy, or depressive symptoms is key to design tailored interventions to ensure a sustained and equitable use of these technologies. Future studies should also assess users’ general health-seeking behavior and their interest and concerns specifically about digital tools. These factors may impact both initial engagement and sustained use.

Patient-physician discordance in assessment of adherence to inhaled controller medication: a cross-sectional analysis of two cohorts

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare patient's and physician's ratings of inhaled medication adherence and to identify predictors of patient-physician discordance.

DESIGN

Baseline data from two prospective multicentre observational studies.

SETTING

29 allergy, pulmonology and paediatric secondary care outpatient clinics in Portugal.

PARTICIPANTS

395 patients (≥13 years old) with persistent asthma.

MEASURES

Data on demographics, patient-physician relationship, upper airway control, asthma control, asthma treatment, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) and healthcare use were collected. Patients and physicians independently assessed adherence to inhaled controller medication during the previous week using a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Discordance was defined as classification in distinct VAS categories (low 0-50; medium 51-80; high 81-100) or as an absolute difference in VAS scores ≥10 mm. Correlation between patients' and physicians' VAS scores/categories was explored. A multinomial logistic regression identified the predictors of physician overestimation and underestimation.

RESULTS

High inhaler adherence was reported both by patients (median (percentile 25 to percentile 75) 85 (65-95) mm; 53% VAS>80) and by physicians (84 (68-95) mm; 53% VAS>80). Correlation between patient and physician VAS scores was moderate (r_s=0.580; p<0.001). Discordance occurred in 56% of cases: in 28% physicians overestimated adherence and in 27% underestimated. Low adherence as assessed by the physician (OR=27.35 (9.85 to 75.95)), FEV₁ ≥80% (OR=2.59 (1.08 to 6.20)) and a first appointment (OR=5.63 (1.24 to 25.56)) were predictors of underestimation. An uncontrolled asthma (OR=2.33 (1.25 to 4.34)), uncontrolled upper airway disease (OR=2.86 (1.35 to 6.04)) and prescription of short-acting beta-agonists alone (OR=3.05 (1.15 to 8.08)) were associated with overestimation. Medium adherence as assessed by the physician was significantly associated with higher risk of discordance, both for overestimation and underestimation of adherence (OR=14.50 (6.04 to 34.81); OR=2.21 (1.07 to 4.58)), while having a written action plan decreased the likelihood of discordance (OR=0.25 (0.12 to 0.52); OR=0.41 (0.22 to 0.78)) (R²=44%).

CONCLUSION

Although both patients and physicians report high inhaler adherence, discordance occurred in half of cases. Implementation of objective adherence measures and effective communication are needed to improve patient-physician agreement.