The effects of expressive writing on lung function, quality of life, medication use, and symptoms in adults with asthma: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Asthma is a chronic condition affecting 300 million people worldwide. Management involves adherence to pharmacological treatments such as corticosteroids and ß-agonists, but residual symptoms persist. As asthma symptoms are exacerbated by stress, one possible adjunct to pharmacological treatment is expressive writing (EW). EW involves the disclosure of traumatic experiences which is thought to facilitate cognitive and emotional processing, helping to reduce physiological stress associated with inhibiting emotions. A previous trial reported short-term improvements in lung function. This study aimed to assess whether EW can improve lung function, quality of life, symptoms, and medication use in patients with asthma. METHODS: Adults (18-45 years) diagnosed as having asthma requiring regular inhaled corticosteroids were recruited from 28 general practices in South East England (n = 146). In this double-blind randomized controlled trial, participants were allocated either EW or nonemotional writing instructions and asked to write for 20 minutes for 3 consecutive days. Lung function (forced expired volume in 1 second [FEV1]% predicted), quality of life (Mark's Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire), asthma symptoms (Wasserfallen Symptom Score Questionnaire), and medication use (inhaled corticosteroids and ß-agonist) were recorded at baseline, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: Hierarchical linear modeling indicated no significant main effects between time and condition on any outcomes. Post hoc analyses revealed that EW improved lung function by 14% for 12 months for participants with less than 80% FEV1% predicted at baseline (ß = 0.93, p = .002) whereas no improvement was observed in the control condition (ß = 0.10, p = .667). CONCLUSIONS: EW seems to be beneficial for patients with moderate asthma (<80% FEV1% predicted). Future studies of EW require stratification of patients by asthma severity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN82986307.

Patients' perceptions of information received about medication prescribed for bipolar disorder: implications for informed choice.

BACKGROUND: Previous research suggests that patients are dissatisfied with information provided about medication prescribed for mental illness, but has not identified which aspects of information provision are unsatisfactory. METHODS: 223 members of the Manic Depression Fellowship (MDF) completed the Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale (SIMS), a validated measure of patients' satisfaction with various aspects of information provision. RESULTS: Patients reported highest dissatisfaction with information about potential problems associated with medication; over 60% of participants reported dissatisfaction with information about the risks of side effects and whether the medication would affect their sex lives. Participants were significantly less satisfied with information about potential problems associated with their medication than people prescribed medication for HIV in a previously reported study (p<.01). Those reporting low adherence to medication had significantly lower satisfaction with information scores than those reporting high adherence (p<.05). LIMITATIONS: The sample could be prone to selection bias; participants were members of an organisation for people affected by bipolar disorder, whilst the comparator group was a NHS HIV clinic sample. Furthermore, the objective amount and type of information provided was not assessed, therefore the cause of patients' dissatisfaction is not known. CONCLUSIONS: Perceived satisfaction with information is low, particularly in relation to possible drug side-effects. Health practitioners need to elicit individuals' information requirements and tailor information to meet their needs, in order to facilitate informed choice and adherence to treatment. Moreover, they need to provide information in a manner appropriate for a patient's cognitive functioning at different illness phases.

Improving medication adherence in bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 30 years of intervention trials.

BACKGROUND: Medication non-adherence in bipolar disorder is a significant problem resulting in increased morbidity, hospitalisation and suicide. Interventions to enhance adherence exist but it is not clear how effective they are, or what works and why. METHODS: We systematically searched bibliographic databases for RCTs of interventions to support adherence to medication in bipolar disorder. Study selection and data extraction was performed by two investigators. Data was extracted on intervention design and delivery, study characteristics, adherence outcomes and study quality. The meta-analysis used pooled odds ratios for adherence using random effects models. RESULTS: Searches identified 795 studies, of which 24 met the inclusion criteria, 18 provided sufficient data for meta-analysis. The pooled OR was 2.27 (95% CI 1.45-3.56) equivalent to a two-fold increase in the odds of adherence in the intervention group relative to control. Smaller effects were seen where the control group consisted of an active comparison and with increasing intervention length. The effects were robust across other factors of intervention and study design and delivery. LIMITATIONS: Many studies did not report sufficient information to classify intervention design and delivery or judge quality and the interventions were highly variable. Therefore, the scope of moderation analysis was limited. CONCLUSIONS: Even brief interventions can improve medication adherence. Limitations in intervention and study design and reporting prevented assessment of which elements of adherence support are most effective. Applying published guidance and quality criteria for designing and reporting adherence interventions is a priority to inform the implementation of cost-effective adherence support.

Understanding medication non-adherence in bipolar disorders using a Necessity-Concerns Framework.

BACKGROUND: Medication non-adherence is a major problem in patients with severe mental disorders and is associated with poor clinical outcomes and high resource utilization. This study examined the utility of the Necessity-Concerns Framework for understanding patient attitudes towards and levels of adherence with medications prescribed for bipolar disorders. METHOD: A convenience sample of 223 individuals currently prescribed medication for bipolar disorders, recruited by advertisement in a Manic Depression Fellowship newsletter, completed the Beliefs about Medication Questionnaire and the Medication Adherence Report Scale. RESULTS: Low adherence was reported by 30% (n=64) and was predicted by greater doubts about personal need for treatment (OR=.50; 95% CI: .31-.82) and stronger concerns about potential negative effects (OR=2.00; 95% CI: 1.20-3.34). These predictors were independent of current mood state, illness and demographic characteristics. LIMITATIONS: Participants were a potentially biased sample of volunteers who had been recruited through a patient organisation newsletter. However, clinical characteristics and adherence rates in this study were similar to those reported in other studies conducted in Europe and the USA. CONCLUSIONS: The Necessity-Concerns Framework is a useful theoretical model for understanding key attitudes towards medication in bipolar disorders. Interventions to facilitate adherence should elicit and address patients' beliefs about medication.

Adherence to medication in bipolar disorder: a qualitative study exploring the role of patients' beliefs about the condition and its treatment.

OBJECTIVES: Patients' perceptions of illness and treatment have been found to predict adherence to medication in many chronic conditions. This has not yet been fully explored in bipolar disorder (BD). The aim was to use a qualitative methodology to explore in depth the beliefs about BD and its treatment that are associated with adherence to medication prescribed for BD. METHODS: Sixteen adults prescribed prophylactic treatment for BD completed semi-structured interviews about their perceptions of BD and its treatment and their adherence to medication. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Two researchers identified perceptions associated with non-adherence in the transcripts. RESULTS: Thirteen participants (81%) reported some degree of intentional or unintentional medication non-adherence. Intentional non-adherence was associated with patients' concerns about the prescribed medication, arising from the experience of side effects, but also from beliefs that regular use could lead to adverse effects in the future. Intentional non-adherence was also associated with doubts about the personal need for medication, which were related to perceptions of BD (e.g., not accepting diagnosis, believing the condition is not controllable, believing it is not a chronic condition). CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified some of the salient beliefs about BD and its treatment that should be elicited and addressed in interventions to facilitate adherence to medication. Further quantitative work is justified to explore the utility of this approach in the development of interventions.