Nina C Wilhelmsen1, Tommy Eriksson1,2. 1. Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway. 2. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To present evidence for healthcare-provided medication adherence interventions on clinical, economic and humanistic outcomes among patients. METHODS: Literature search of systematic reviews in Medline, Embase and CINAHL (2007-2017), validation of quality using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses questionnaires and, finally, extraction, combination and tabulation of results for included studies. RESULTS: From eight systematic reviews with medium to high AMSTAR 2 score, 37 randomised controlled studies involving 28 600 participants were extracted. Patient education and counselling showed some positive effects on medication adherence. Patient education also showed some positive effects on morbidity, healthcare utilities and patient satisfaction. Counselling had some benefit on mortality and healthcare utilisation. Simplifying doses was shown to have some benefit on morbidity and patient satisfaction. Interventions delivered by pharmacists and nurses showed a better result in improving adherence and outcomes than interventions delivered by general practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: Some interventions were found to have positive effect on adherence and outcomes, but no single strategy showed improvement in all settings. For future research patients should be screened for non-adherence to reveal both if they are non-adherent and type of non-adherence, as well as bigger sample sizes and longer duration of follow-up.
OBJECTIVE: To present evidence for healthcare-provided medication adherence interventions on clinical, economic and humanistic outcomes among patients. METHODS: Literature search of systematic reviews in Medline, Embase and CINAHL (2007-2017), validation of quality using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses questionnaires and, finally, extraction, combination and tabulation of results for included studies. RESULTS: From eight systematic reviews with medium to high AMSTAR 2 score, 37 randomised controlled studies involving 28 600 participants were extracted. Patient education and counselling showed some positive effects on medication adherence. Patient education also showed some positive effects on morbidity, healthcare utilities and patient satisfaction. Counselling had some benefit on mortality and healthcare utilisation. Simplifying doses was shown to have some benefit on morbidity and patient satisfaction. Interventions delivered by pharmacists and nurses showed a better result in improving adherence and outcomes than interventions delivered by general practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: Some interventions were found to have positive effect on adherence and outcomes, but no single strategy showed improvement in all settings. For future research patients should be screened for non-adherence to reveal both if they are non-adherent and type of non-adherence, as well as bigger sample sizes and longer duration of follow-up.
Authors: Scot H Simpson; Dean T Eurich; Sumit R Majumdar; Rajdeep S Padwal; Ross T Tsuyuki; Janice Varney; Jeffrey A Johnson Journal: BMJ Date: 2006-06-21
Authors: Beverley J Shea; Candyce Hamel; George A Wells; Lex M Bouter; Elizabeth Kristjansson; Jeremy Grimshaw; David A Henry; Maarten Boers Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2009-02-20 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: M Christopher Roebuck; Joshua N Liberman; Marin Gemmill-Toyama; Troyen A Brennan Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Alice Dragomir; Robert Côté; Louise Roy; Lucie Blais; Lyne Lalonde; Anick Bérard; Sylvie Perreault Journal: Med Care Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Bradi B Granger; Karl Swedberg; Inger Ekman; Christopher B Granger; Bertil Olofsson; John J V McMurray; Salim Yusuf; Eric L Michelson; Marc A Pfeffer Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-10 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Alessandro Liberati; Douglas G Altman; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Cynthia Mulrow; Peter C Gøtzsche; John P A Ioannidis; Mike Clarke; P J Devereaux; Jos Kleijnen; David Moher Journal: BMJ Date: 2009-07-21
Authors: Beverley J Shea; Jeremy M Grimshaw; George A Wells; Maarten Boers; Neil Andersson; Candyce Hamel; Ashley C Porter; Peter Tugwell; David Moher; Lex M Bouter Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2007-02-15 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Marcee E Wilder; Paige Kulie; Caroline Jensen; Paul Levett; Janice Blanchard; Luis W Dominguez; Maria Portela; Aneil Srivastava; Yixuan Li; Melissa L McCarthy Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Youfa Wang; Jungwon Min; Jacob Khuri; Hong Xue; Bo Xie; Leonard A Kaminsky; Lawrence J Cheskin Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2020-04-28 Impact factor: 4.773
Authors: Bart P H Pouls; Johanna E Vriezekolk; Charlotte L Bekker; Annemiek J Linn; Hein A W van Onzenoort; Marcia Vervloet; Sandra van Dulmen; Bart J F van den Bemt Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-01-08 Impact factor: 5.428