Perception of Medication Safety-Related Behaviors Among Different Age Groups: Web-Based Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Previous research and safety advocacy groups have proposed various behaviors for older adults to actively engage in medication safety. However, little is known about how older adults perceive the importance and reasonableness of these behaviors in ambulatory settings. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess older adults' perceptions of the importance and reasonableness of 8 medication safety behaviors in ambulatory settings and compare their responses with those of younger adults. METHODS: We conducted a survey of 1222 adults in the United States using crowdsourcing to evaluate patient behaviors that may enhance medication safety in community settings. A total of 8 safety behaviors were identified based on the literature, such as bringing medications to office visits, confirming medications at home, managing medication refills, using patient portals, organizing medications, checking medications, getting help, and knowing medications. Respondents were asked about their perception of the importance and reasonableness of these behaviors on a 5-point Likert rating scale in the context of collaboration with primary care providers. We assessed the relative ranking of behaviors in terms of importance and reasonableness and examined the association between these dimensions across age groups using statistical tests. RESULTS: Of 1222 adult participants, 125 (10.2%) were aged 65 years or older. Most participants were White, college-educated, and had chronic conditions. Older adults rated all 8 behaviors significantly higher in both importance and reasonableness than did younger adults (P<.001 for combined behaviors). Confirming medications ranked highest in importance (mean score=3.78) for both age groups while knowing medications ranked highest in reasonableness (mean score=3.68). Using patient portals was ranked lowest in importance (mean score=3.53) and reasonableness (mean score=3.49). There was a significant correlation between the perceived importance and reasonableness of the identified behaviors, with coefficients ranging from 0.436 to 0.543 (all P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults perceived the identified safety behaviors as more important and reasonable than younger adults. However, both age groups considered a behavior highly recommended by professionals as the least important and reasonable. Patient engagement strategies, common and specific to age groups, should be considered to improve medication safety in ambulatory settings.

Patient Partnership Tools to Support Medication Safety in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Protocol for a Nonrandomized Stepped Wedge Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Preventable harms from medications are significant threats to patient safety in community settings, especially among ambulatory older adults on multiple prescription medications. Patients may partner with primary care professionals by taking on active roles in decisions, learning the basics of medication self-management, and working with community resources. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the impact of a set of patient partnership tools that redesign primary care encounters to encourage and empower patients to make more effective use of those encounters to improve medication safety. METHODS: The study is a nonrandomized, cross-sectional stepped wedge cluster-controlled trial with 1 private family medicine clinic and 2 public safety-net primary care clinics each composing their own cluster. There are 2 intervention sequences with 1 cluster per sequence and 1 control sequence with 1 cluster. Cross-sectional surveys will be taken immediately at the conclusion of visits to the clinics during 6 time periods of 6 weeks each, with a transition period of no data collection during intervention implementation. The number of visits to be surveyed will vary by period and cluster. We plan to recruit patients and professionals for surveys during 405 visits. In the experimental periods, visits will be conducted with two partnership tools and associated clinic process changes: (1) a 1-page visit preparation guide given to relevant patients by clinic staff before seeing the provider, with the intention to improve communication and shared decision-making, and (2) a library of short educational videos that clinic staff encourage patients to watch on medication safety. In the control periods, visits will be conducted with usual care. The primary outcome will be patients' self-efficacy in medication use. The secondary outcomes are medication-related issues such as duplicate therapies identified by primary care providers and assessment of collaborative work during visits. RESULTS: The study was funded in September 2019. Data collection started in April 2023 and ended in December 2023. Data was collected for 405 primary care encounters during that period. As of February 15, 2024, initial descriptive statistics were calculated. Full data analysis is expected to be completed and published in the summer of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This study will assess the impact of patient partnership tools and associated process changes in primary care on medication use self-efficacy and medication-related issues. The study is powered to identify types of patients who may benefit most from patient engagement tools in primary care visits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05880368; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05880368. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/57878.

Cancer treatment-related decision-making among culturally and linguistically diverse older adults with cancer: A scoping review by the International Society of Geriatric Oncology Nursing and Allied Health Interest Group.

INTRODUCTION: Countries with large economies are observing a growing number of culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) older adults, many of whom will be affected by cancer. Little is known about the experiences and factors that influence cancer treatment decision-making in this population. The purposes of this scoping review are: (1) to summarize the published literature on cancer treatment-related decision-making with this population; and (2) to identify potential differences in how cancer treatment decisions are made compared to non-CALD older adults with cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a scoping review following Arksey and O'Malley and Levac methods, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Scoping Review Guidelines. We conducted a comprehensive multidatabase search, screening 1,139 titles/abstracts. Following data abstraction, we analyzed the data using tabular and narrative summary. RESULTS: We extracted data from six studies that met the inclusion criteria: four quantitative and two qualitative; five from the United States and one from Canada. Three themes were identified: (1) barriers to decision-making, (2) the influence of family and friends on decisionmaking, and (3) differences in uptake and types of treatment received between CALD and non-CALD older adults. DISCUSSION: This comprehensive review of treatment decision-making among CALD older adults with cancer highlights the paucity of research in this area. The findings are limited to North American populations and may not represent experiences in other regions of the world. Future research should focus on studying their treatment-related decision-making experiences to improve the quality of care for this vulnerable population.

Assessing Interventions on Crowdsourcing Platforms to Nudge Patients for Engagement Behaviors in Primary Care Settings: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Engaging patients in health behaviors is critical for better outcomes, yet many patient partnership behaviors are not widely adopted. Behavioral economics-based interventions offer potential solutions, but it is challenging to assess the time and cost needed for different options. Crowdsourcing platforms can efficiently and rapidly assess the efficacy of such interventions, but it is unclear if web-based participants respond to simulated incentives in the same way as they would to actual incentives. OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were (1) to assess the feasibility of using crowdsourced surveys to evaluate behavioral economics interventions for patient partnerships by examining whether web-based participants responded to simulated incentives in the same way they would have responded to actual incentives, and (2) to assess the impact of 2 behavioral economics-based intervention designs, psychological rewards and loss of framing, on simulated medication reconciliation behaviors in a simulated primary care setting. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial using a between-subject design on a crowdsourcing platform (Amazon Mechanical Turk) to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioral interventions designed to improve medication adherence in primary care visits. The study included a control group that represented the participants' baseline behavior and 3 simulated interventions, namely monetary compensation, a status effect as a psychological reward, and a loss frame as a modification of the status effect. Participants' willingness to bring medicines to a primary care visit was measured on a 5-point Likert scale. A reverse-coding question was included to ensure response intentionality. RESULTS: A total of 569 study participants were recruited. There were 132 in the baseline group, 187 in the monetary compensation group, 149 in the psychological reward group, and 101 in the loss frame group. All 3 nudge interventions increased participants' willingness to bring medicines significantly when compared to the baseline scenario. The monetary compensation intervention caused an increase of 17.51% (P<.001), psychological rewards on status increased willingness by 11.85% (P<.001), and a loss frame on psychological rewards increased willingness by 24.35% (P<.001). Responses to the reverse-coding question were consistent with the willingness questions. CONCLUSIONS: In primary care, bringing medications to office visits is a frequently advocated patient partnership behavior that is nonetheless not widely adopted. Crowdsourcing platforms such as Amazon Mechanical Turk support efforts to efficiently and rapidly reach large groups of individuals to assess the efficacy of behavioral interventions. We found that crowdsourced survey-based experiments with simulated incentives can produce valid simulated behavioral responses. The use of psychological status design, particularly with a loss framing approach, can effectively enhance patient engagement in primary care. These results support the use of crowdsourcing platforms to augment and complement traditional approaches to learning about behavioral economics for patient engagement.