| Literature DB >> 28506955 |
Sherif M Badawy1,2, Leonardo Barrera3, Mohamad G Sinno4, Saara Kaviany5, Linda C O'Dwyer6, Lisa M Kuhns7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The number of adolescents with chronic health conditions (CHCs) continues to increase. Medication nonadherence is a global challenge among adolescents across chronic conditions and is associated with poor health outcomes. While there has been growing interest in the use of mHealth technology to improve medication adherence among adolescents with CHCs, particularly text messaging and mobile phone apps, there has been no prior systematic review of their efficacy.Entities:
Keywords: adolescents; chronic health conditions; chronic medical conditions; medication adherence; mobile phone apps; smartphone applications; smartphone apps; text messaging
Year: 2017 PMID: 28506955 PMCID: PMC5447825 DOI: 10.2196/mhealth.7798
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth ISSN: 2291-5222 Impact factor: 4.773
Figure 1Flow of studies through the review according to PRISMA guidelines.
Summary of included studies that focused on improving adherence in adolescents with CHCs using text message or mobile phone app interventions.
| Source (condition) | Intervention (study design) | Age (years) | Participants | Adherence measure | Grade |
| Boker et al 2012, USA (acne) [ | Text messages (RCT) | Mean (SD) (range): Entire cohort 22.7 (5.7) (12-35) | Total N: Enrolled (40) | Medication event monitoring system | Low |
| Fabbrocini et al 2014, Italy (acne) [ | Text messages (RCT) | Mean age: Text 19.5 | Total N: Enrolled (160) | 7-day recall self-report | Low |
| Ostojic et al 2005, Croatia and USA (asthma) [ | Text messages and in-person sessions (RCT) | Mean (SD): 24.6 (6.5) | Final N=16: Intervention (8); Control (8) | Self-report of daily medication use in a paper diary | Low |
| Hammonds et al 2015, USA (depression) [ | Mobile phone app (RCT) | Mean (SD): 20.6 (4.3) | Total N: Enrolled (57) | Pill count | Low |
| Cafazzo et al 2012, Canada (diabetes mellitus) [ | Mobile phone app “ | Mean (SD): 15.1 (1.3) | Total N=20: Withdrawal (2) | Self-report | Moderate |
| Laboratory marker (glycosylated hemoglobin “HbA1c”) | |||||
| Franklin et al 2006, UK (diabetes mellitus) [ | Text messages “Sweet Talk” (ST) (RCT) | Age (median, range): CIT 12.7 (10.5-14.8) | Total N: Enrolled (92) | Self-report | Moderate |
| Laboratory marker (HbA1c) | |||||
| Louch et al 2013, UK (diabetes mellitus) [ | Text messages (RCT) | Range for entire cohort is 18-30 | Total N: Enrolled (19) | Self-report | Low |
| Mulvaney et al 2012, USA (diabetes mellitus) [ | Text messages “SuperEgo” (pilot trial with a historical control) | Mean (SD): Intervention 15.9 (2.9); Controls 15.8 (2.7) | Enrolled (28) | Laboratory marker (HbA1c) | Low |
| Dowshen et al 2012, USA (human immunodeficiency virus “HIV”) [ | Text messages (pilot trial, pre-post design) | Mean (range): 23 (14-29) | Total N: Enrolled (25) | Self-report (visual analogue scale and AIDS Clinical Trials Group) | Low |
| Laboratory markers (viral load and CD4 cell count) | |||||
| Garofalo et al 2015, USA (HIV) [ | Text messages (RCT) | Mean (SD): 24.1 (2.9) | Final N=105: Control (51) Intervention (54) | Self-report (visual analogue scale) | Moderate |
| Laboratory markers (viral load and CD4 cell count) | |||||
| McKenzie et al 2015, USA (liver transplant) [ | Text messages (pilot trial with a historical control) | Median (range): 16 (12-20) | N=42 | Laboratory testing participation rate | Low |
| Miloh et al 2009, USA (liver transplant) [ | Text messages (pilot trial, pre-post design) | Median (range): 15 (1-27) | Total N: Enrolled (41) | Laboratory markers (tacrommilus levels and SD values) | Low |
| Creary et al 2014, USA (sickle cell disease) [ | Text messages and Mobile Direct Observed Therapy “m-DOT” (pilot trial, pre-post design) | Mean (SD): 13.7 (6.3) | Total N=15 | Observed adherence | Very low |
| Self-report (Morisky Medication Adherence Scale) | |||||
| Medication possession ratio | |||||
| Laboratory markers (fetal hemoglobin and mean corpuscular volume) | |||||
| Estepp et al 2014, USA (sickle cell disease) [ | Text messages “SIMON” (retrospective study) | Median (range): 13.9 (12.1-16.1) | Total N=83 | Medication possession ratio | Low |
| Laboratory markers (fetal hemoglobin and mean corpuscular volume) | |||||
| Ting et al 2011, USA (systemic lupus erythematosus) [ | Text messages (RCT) | Mean (SD): 18.6 (2.5) | Final N=41: Intervention (19); Control (22) | Self-report (Medication Adherence Self-Report Inventory) | Low |
| Medication possession ratio | |||||
| Laboratory markers (hydroxychloroquine levels) |
Description of text message interventions.
| Author/year (condition) | Intervention purpose | Intervention description |
| Boker et al, 2012 (acne) [ | Improve adherence to recommended use of topical acne medication (text messages) | Text messages twice daily (Duac in AM, Gifferin in PM) for 12 weeks |
| Customized electronic reminder schedule at a specific time based on patient preferences and anticipated time of each medication use | ||
| 2-way communication: patients asked to text back a reply if and when each application was completed | ||
| Identical text with general content to all patients, varied only by starting with patient’s first name | ||
| Texts were sent through: www.LetterMeLater.com | ||
| Fabbrocini et al, 2014 (acne) [ | Improve adherence to acne medications (text messages) | Texts twice daily for 12 weeks (11 consecutive days) |
| Texts focused on frequently asked questions about acne medications, such as administration, daily dose, and side effects | ||
| Texts were identical to all patients (no customization) covering 11 frequently asked questions | ||
| Texts re-sent in same sequence every 11 days until end of 12 weeks | ||
| Ostojic et al, 2005 (asthma) [ | Improve adherence to inhaled medications and peak expiratory flow (PEF) monitoring (text messages and in-person sessions) | Patients sent their PEF results daily via text messages for 16 weeks |
| Data connected to a computer with software that automatically computed maximal, minimal, and mean PEF, PEF variability, and compliance | ||
| PEF measurements 3 times daily with medication use and symptoms in paper diary | ||
| Therapy was adjusted weekly by an asthma specialist according to peak expiratory flow meter (PEFM) values received daily from the patients | ||
| 1-hour asthma education session with specialist at clinic: discussed symptoms, asthma symptom score, indicators of control, medication use, and correct use of metered dose inhaler and PEFM | ||
| Louch et al, 2013 (diabetes mellitus) [ | Improve insulin administration in young adults with type 1 diabetes; test moderation of intervention effect by personality factors (text messages) | Text messages sent daily (1-way communication) at 10 am for 14 days |
| No customization of message content | ||
| Text content was related to the correct insulin administration | ||
| Text targeted constructs of the Theory of Planned Behavior: attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and intention | ||
| Mulvaney et al, 2012 (diabetes mellitus) [ | Motivate patients and remind them with their diabetes self-care tasks (text messages “SuperEgo”) | 8-12 text messages/week for 12 weeks |
| Scheduled just before and after mealtimes and before bedtime | ||
| Customization with users able to alter timing and frequency of messages through a website | ||
| Messages could be scheduled in a 1-way communication at specific times of day within 15 minute increments and automated to be sent once only, or repeated based on participant preferences, such as daily, weekly, or on weekends | ||
| Individually tailored messages: 75% of messages tailored to the top 3 patient-specific adherence barriers reported; and 25% of messages were randomly selected from the remaining message pool | ||
| Four functions were included in the system: assessment, message selection, message scheduling, and requests for messages from others | ||
| Text messages were created in collaboration with 96 adolescents with diabetes mellitus and no messages were repeated | ||
| Participants could add their own messages, search for messages, and delete, change, or reschedule them using their mobile phone | ||
| Participants could also search for and select messages that were associated with a particular goal | ||
| Participants could ask other SuperEgo users for messages relating to a specific goal and then schedule that message for themselves | ||
| Messages could be specified as private or public | ||
| Participants could nominate people as part of their support team by entering that person’s email address into the system to contribute messages for patients | ||
| Franklin et al, 2006 (diabetes mellitus) [ | Improve patients’ self-efficacy and glycemic control, and enhance their uptake of intensive insulin therapy (text messages “Sweet Talk”) | Text message reminders for 12 months |
| Weekly reminders of the goal set in clinic, and daily reminders providing tips, information, or reminders to reinforce this goal | ||
| Text messages automated, scheduled, and designed to offer regular support and optimize their self-management and control | ||
| Database of over 400 messages that encompass the four main diabetes self-management tasks (insulin injections, blood-glucose testing, healthy eating, and exercise) | ||
| Messages tailored based on patients goals and patients’ age, sex, and diabetes regimen | ||
| Occasional text “newsletters” regarding topical diabetes issues | ||
| Motivational support network | ||
| Dowshen et al, 2012 (HIV) [ | Improve adherence to antiretroviral therapy among youth (text messages) | Daily 2-way text messages for 24 weeks |
| Delivered at prespecified time schedule | ||
| Personalized content, patients were encouraged to develop messages that maintain their confidentiality | ||
| Interactive with follow-up messages with patients responding with number (1) if they took their medication and (2) if they did not | ||
| Participants could reach out to study coordinator at any time to change the message or to reprogram the message if their mobile service was interrupted | ||
| Texts were sent through: http://www.intelecare.com/ | ||
| Garofalo et al, 2015 (HIV) [ | Improve adherence to antiretroviral therapy among poorly adherent youth (text messages) | Daily text messages reminder for 6 months |
| Initial messages were followed by a second message 15 min later to check if patients took their medications in a 2-way communication | ||
| Personalized by subject for both content and schedule to be timed with medication doses | ||
| Customization with initial message and follow-up messages were designed by the youth themselves | ||
| Texts content were culture and identity sensitive and meaningful to participants | ||
| Texts content used more indirect language to maintain confidentiality | ||
| Motivational or encouraging follow-up messages were randomly sent to participants based on their affirmative or negative response | ||
| Participants were encouraged to delete messages after taking medication and to use passcode protection to maintain phone confidentiality | ||
| Sent/received and failed/invalid messages were summarized in weekly reports and sent to research staff to follow up with participants | ||
| Texts were sent through: http://www.remedyhealthmedia.com/ | ||
| Miloh et al, 2009 (liver transplant) [ | Improve adherence to immunosuppressant medications (text messages) | Mean duration of the study 13 (SD 1.5) months |
| Text schedule was customized at day/time specified by user | ||
| 2-way communication where patients were expected to respond to text message to confirm medication intake; if no response within 15 min to 1-hour caregiver notified via text | ||
| Text messages were sent to the person responsible for medication intake (patient or caregiver) | ||
| Patients or their caregivers registered and entered their information into texting platform (MediM system) with a personal password | ||
| Entered information included patient’s name and mobile phone number, caregiver’s name/ nickname and mobile phone number, the medication name and frequency, and the exact times of text messages they want to receive | ||
| Participants did not enter medication dose as that might change based laboratory test results | ||
| No customization as text messages content was the same for all patients | ||
| Text messages were read: “Take [name of medication] at [set time]. To confirm intake, press REPLY, type CARE 1, and press SEND.” | ||
| Participants reimbursed for all text messages costs during the study | ||
| Texts were sent through: http://www.carespeak.com/corp/ | ||
| McKenzie et al, 2015 (liver transplant) [ | Improve participation in laboratory testing among youth (text messages) | Automated laboratory tests text message reminders for 12 months |
| Text message timed with lab tests (monthly, bimonthly, quarterly) as reminder to complete lab tests | ||
| Text message reminders sent first Monday of each month when testing was due | ||
| On last Monday of the month, patients received a message about laboratory testing completion | ||
| Same message content for all patients | ||
| 2-way communication as patients replied back as yes/no responses | ||
| No reimbursement for the cost of text messages, but all participants had unlimited text plans | ||
| Mobile phone numbers entered into a secure website with secure-password | ||
| $31/month to maintain the intervention or website domain | ||
| Estepp et al, 2014 (sickle cell disease) [ | Improve adherence to hydroxyurea therapy (text messages: SIMON) | Scheduled daily text message reminders for 12 months |
| Customizable for content, frequency, and duration | ||
| Participants created their own messages | ||
| Changes in text messages regimen checked every 3-4 clinic visits | ||
| Messages delivery was monitored (received and undelivered) and participants could optionally reply | ||
| Messages sent through a Web-based app | ||
| Ting et al, 2011 (systemic lupus erythematosus) [ | A. Visit adherence intervention | Text reminders sent 7, 3, and 1 day prior to each scheduled f/u clinic appointment |
| Mean duration of the study 12 (SD 5) months | ||
| Content was individualized for each patient and included the scheduled appointment time | ||
| If a patient didn’t schedule follow-up appointment within 2–3 weeks after completed clinic visit, they would get a text reminder to do so | ||
| B. HCQ adherence intervention | Standardized daily text reminders for hydroxychloroquine intake daily or twice daily | |
| Mean duration of the study 12 (SD 5) months | ||
| Text reminders at set time of day, according to hydroxychloroquine schedule | ||
| Printed information sheet that was given to the standard of care group |
Description of mobile phone app interventions.
| Author/year (condition) | Intervention purpose | Intervention description |
| Hammonds et al, 2015 (depression) [ | Improve adherence to antidepressant medications among college students using mobile phone app reminders | Medication reminders through mobile phone app for 4 weeks |
| Entered prescribed information for medication doses | ||
| Patients indicate when they had taken their medication by responding to reminders received | ||
| Cafazzo et al, 2012 (diabetes mellitus) [ | Improve self-management among youth (mobile phone app “ | App exposure for 12-week pilot study |
| Adapter that allows a OneTouch UltraMini glucometer to communicate via Bluetooth, allowing the transfer of blood glucose reading wirelessly, to the iPhone device running the mobile phone app, “ | ||
| Analysis tools assess the data soon after transfer to give adolescents real-time feedback | ||
| Data analysis and trending screens display the percentage of blood glucose levels that are in range at specific times | ||
| Communication with peers in an app-secure community area as a support network | ||
| Rewards algorithm with point allocations | ||
| Creary et al, 2014 (sickle cell disease) [ | Improve adherence to hydroxyurea (m-DOT, multidimensional strategy for 6 months) | |
| Alert reminders: automated daily alerts to remind patients to take hydroxyurea; alert sent at time preferred by patients; alerts stopped when a video is submitted; up to 4 text messages and email were sent daily | ||
| Videos: participants created daily videos of them taking hydroxyurea; videos submitted electronically to the secure study website; captured by mobile phones or computers; included participants’ study ID; self-recorded videos for children 12 years or older, younger patients had assistance from parents | ||
| Feedback: submitted videos were reviewed by research team within 72 hours of receipt; text and email feedback was sent to participants if they missed ≥2 video submissions in a 30-day period; participants were called if they missed ≥3 video submissions in a 30-day period; positive reinforcement (≥2 text messages or emails) was provided if they participants had adherence of ≥90% | ||
| Incentives: if participants achieved ≥90% of adherence to hydroxyurea for each 30-day period, they would receive $1/day |
Effect size d for the main outcomes of included studies.
| Source (intervention) | Study adherence outcomes | |
| Boker et al, 2012 (text messaging) [ | Medication event monitoring system | No data available |
| Fabbrocini et al, 2014 (text messaging) [ | 7-day recall self-report | No data available |
| Ostojic et al, 2005 (text messaging and in-person sessions) [ | Self-report of daily inhaled corticosteroids | 0.35 (-0.64 to 1.4) |
| Self-report of daily beta2-agonist | 0.7 (-0.31 to 1.71) | |
| Hammonds et al, 2015 (mobile phone app) [ | Pill count of antidepressants | 0.31 (-0.21 to 0.83) |
| Cafazzo et al, 2012 (mobile phone app) [ | Self-report using personal blood glucose meters | 0.11 (-0.69 to 0.91) |
| Laboratory markers using glycosylated hemoglobin | 0.45 (-0.36 to 1.26) | |
| Franklin et al, 2006 (text messaging) [ | Self-report using a visual analogue scale | 0.38 (-0.14 to 0.89) |
| Laboratory marker using glycosylated hemoglobin | 0.12 (-0.4 to 0.63) | |
| Louch et al, 2013 (text messaging) [ | Self-report of insulin administration | 1.1 (0.11 to 2.1)b |
| Mulvaney et al, 2012 (text messaging) | Laboratory markers using glycosylated hemoglobin | 0.5 (-0.1 to 1.1) |
| Dowshen et al, 2012 (text messaging) [ | Self-report using visual analogue scale | 1.43 (0.75 to 2.11)b |
| Self-report using AIDS Clinical Trials Group questionnaire | 0.86 (0.22 to 1.49)b | |
| Laboratory marker using viral load | 0.43 (-0.18 to 1.04) | |
| Laboratory marker using CD4 cell count | 0.19 (-0.42 to 0.79) | |
| Garofalo et al, 2012 (text messaging) [ | Self-report using visual analogue scale | 0.49 (0.11 to 0.89)b |
| Laboratory markers using viral load | 0.19 (-0.18 to 0.58) | |
| McKenzie et al, 2015 (text messaging) [ | Laboratory testing participation rate | 0.66 (0.22 to 1.1)b |
| Miloh et al, 2009 (text messaging) [ | Laboratory markers using tacromilus – overall | 1.23 (0.62 to 1.85)b |
| Laboratory markers using tacromilus – one medication | 1.02 (0.42 to 1.6)b | |
| Laboratory markers using tacromilus – two medications | 1.39 (0.77 to 2.03)b | |
| Laboratory markers using tacromilus – three medications | 2.11 (1.41 to 2.82)b | |
| Creary et al, 2014 (text messaging and m-DOT) [ | Medication possession ratio | 1.04 (0.25 to 1.83)b |
| Laboratory markers using fetal hemoglobin | 0.1 (-0.31 to 0.51) | |
| Laboratory markers using mean corpuscular volume | 0.54 (-0.22 to 1.29) | |
| Estepp et al, 2014 (text messaging) [ | Medication possession ratio | 0.07 (-0.31 to 0.44) |
| Laboratory markers using fetal hemoglobin | 0.1 (-0.31 to 0.51) | |
| Laboratory markers using mean corpuscular volume | 0.18 (-0.24 to 0.59) | |
| Ting et al, 2011 (text messaging) [ | Self-report using medication adherence inventory | No data available |
| Medication possession ratio | No data available | |
| Laboratory marker for hydroxychloroquine | No data available |
aPositive effect size value means improvement in a study outcome, while a negative one means worsening outcome.
bStatistically significant P<.05.