Exploring the Multidimensional Relationship Between Medication Beliefs and Adherence to Medications Among Older Adults Living With Multimorbidity Using Polynomial Regression: An Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: People living with multimorbidity may hold complex beliefs about medicines, potentially influencing adherence. Polynomial regression offers a novel approach to examining the multidimensional relationship between medication beliefs and adherence, overcoming limitations associated with difference scores. PURPOSE: To explore the multidimensional relationship between medication beliefs and adherence among people living with multimorbidity. METHODS: Secondary analysis was conducted using observational data from a cohort of older adults living with ≥2 chronic conditions, recruited from 15 family practices in Ireland in 2010 (n = 812) and followed up in 2012 (n = 515). Medication beliefs were measured with the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire-Specific. Adherence was assessed with the medication possession ratio using prescription data from the national primary care reimbursement service. Polynomial regression was used to explore the best-fitting multidimensional models for the relationship between (i) beliefs and adherence at baseline, and (ii) beliefs at baseline and adherence at follow-up. RESULTS: Confirmatory polynomial regression rejected the difference-score model, and exploratory polynomial regression indicated quadratic models for both analyses. Reciprocal effects were present in both analyses (slope [Analysis 1]: ß = 0.08, p = .007; slope [Analysis 2]: ß = 0.07, p = .044), indicating that adherence was higher when necessity beliefs were high and concern beliefs were low. Nonreciprocal effects were also present in both analyses (slope [Analysis 1]: ß = 0.05, p = .006; slope [Analysis 2]: ß = 0.04, p = .043), indicating that adherence was higher when both necessity and concern beliefs were high. CONCLUSIONS: Among people living with multimorbidity, there is evidence that the relationship between medication beliefs and adherence is multidimensional. Attempts to support adherence should consider the combined role of necessity and concern beliefs.

When people live with multiple ongoing health conditions, they might have complex beliefs about their prescribed medicines. These beliefs could relate to the perceived necessity of medicines (necessity beliefs) and perceived concerns about medicines (concern beliefs). This study aimed to explore how necessity and concern beliefs, in combination, relate to the extent to which people living with multiple ongoing conditions take their medicines as prescribed. The study analyzed an existing dataset that included 812 older adults recruited via family practice settings in Ireland in 2010. Of these, 515 people were followed up again in 2012. All participants were living with at least two ongoing health conditions. Participants self-reported their medication-related necessity and concern beliefs by completing a questionnaire. Their level of medication taking was calculated using pharmacy records. The results showed that having a combination of high necessity beliefs and low concern beliefs was related to higher levels of medication taking than having a combination of low necessity beliefs and high concern beliefs. Having a combination of high necessity beliefs and high concern beliefs was related to higher levels of medication taking than having a combination of low necessity beliefs and low concern beliefs. Attempts to support patients to take their medicines should consider the combined role of their necessity and concern beliefs on behavior.

An external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care (PolyPrime).

BACKGROUND: For older populations with multimorbidity, polypharmacy (use of multiple medications) is a standard practice. PolyPrime is a theory-based intervention developed to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care. This pilot study aims to assess the feasibility of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care in Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). METHODS: This external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aimed to recruit 12 general practitioner (GP) practices (six in NI; six in the ROI counties that border NI) and ten older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥ 4 medications) per GP practice (n = 120). Practices allocated to the intervention arm watched an online video and scheduled medication reviews with patients on two occasions. We assessed the feasibility of collecting GP record (medication appropriateness, health service use) and patient self-reported data [health-related quality of life (HRQoL), health service use)] at baseline, 6 and 9 months. HRQoL was measured using the EuroQol-5 dimension-5 level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and medication-related burden quality-of-life (MRB-QoL) tool. An embedded process evaluation and health economics analysis were also undertaken. Pre-specified progression criteria were used to determine whether to proceed to a definitive cRCT. RESULTS: Twelve GP practices were recruited and randomised. Three GP practices withdrew from the study due to COVID-related factors. Sixty-eight patients were recruited, with 47 (69.1%) being retained until the end of the study. GP record data were available for 47 patients for medication appropriateness analysis at 9 months. EQ-5D-5L and MRB-QoL data were available for 46 and 41 patients, respectively, at 9 months. GP record and patient self-reported health service use data were available for 47 patients at 9 months. Health service use was comparable in terms of overall cost estimated from GP record versus patient self-reported data. The intervention was successfully delivered as intended; it was acceptable to GPs, practice staff, and patients; and potential mechanisms of action have been identified. All five progression criteria were met (two 'Go', three 'Amend'). CONCLUSION: Despite challenges faced during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study has demonstrated that it may be feasible to conduct an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care across two healthcare jurisdictions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN41009897 . Registered 19 November 2019. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

Young adult preferences for digital health interventions to support adherence to inhaled corticosteroids in asthma: a qualitative study.

Objective: Adherence to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) among young adults living with asthma is low and in need of appropriate intervention. Digital health interventions (DHIs) have demonstrated potential to improve ICS adherence; however, young adult preferences for these DHIs and how their use could support adherence in this population remain understudied. Therefore, this study aimed to explore young adult preferences for ICS adherence supports and potential DHI features to deliver these supports, in order to improve adherence behaviour throughout this critical developmental stage of the lifespan. Methods: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 young adults living with asthma. Analysis followed an inductive, reflexive thematic approach. Results: Participant's age ranged from 18 to 30 years (M = 24.7; 8 female). Three themes were developed from the analysis: 'Enabling young adults to find their 'own way of knowing', 'Support for making a habit of adherence', and 'Providing accessible information' which included the sub-themes: 'Education on asthma self-management and medication', 'Self-monitoring information' and 'Personal feedback on outcomes of adherence'. Suggested features to deliver these supports included a medication and prescription refill reminder, adherence charts, symptom and trigger monitoring, rewards for adherence, visual representations of lungs demonstrating the impact of adherence and lung function monitoring. Conclusion: DHIs may offer an appropriate solution to improve suboptimal adherence to ICS in young adults. However, it is crucial that young adult preferences for adherence supports and features are integrated into these interventions in order to optimise engagement and support adherence behaviour in this population.

The use of postal audit and feedback among Irish General Practitioners for the self - management of antimicrobial prescribing: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Inappropriate use of antibiotics has been acknowledged as a significant contributor to the proliferation of antimicrobial resistance worldwide. Physician prescribing of antibiotics has been identified as a factor in the inappropriate use of antibiotics. One methodology that is used in an attempt to alter physician prescribing behaviours is audit and feedback. This study aimed to explore the perceptions of Irish General Practitioners (GPs) towards the national introduction of postal feedback on their antibiotic prescribing behaviours beginning in 2019. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive methodology was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs in receipt of postal audit and feedback. METHOD: GPs working in Ireland and in receipt of postal audit and feedback on their antibiotic prescribing behaviours participated in phone-based interviews. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The collected data was then analysed using an inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twelve GPs participated in the study (female = 5). Three themes were identified from the analysis. The themes identified were the reliability and validity of the feedback received, feedback on antibiotic prescribing is useful but limited and feedback needs to be easily digestible. CONCLUSION: While the postal audit and feedback were broadly welcomed by the participants, the themes identified a perceived limitation in the quality of the feedback data, the perception of a likely low public health impact of the feedback and difficulties with efficiently processing the audit and feedback information. These findings can help refine future audit and feedback interventions on antibiotic prescribing.

'Just keep taking them, keep hoping they'll work': A qualitative study of adhering to medications for multimorbidity.

OBJECTIVE: Compared to single diseases, health psychology reflects many areas of medical research by affording relatively less attention to the experiences of people self-managing multiple co-occurring conditions and, in particular, the experience of managing the associated complex medication regimens. This study aimed to explore the experience of self-managing multimorbidity among older adults, with a focus on medication adherence. DESIGN: A qualitative approach was taken, using individual semi-structured interviews. METHODS: Sixteen people with complex multimorbidity aged 65 years or older were recruited through general practice to take part in semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed following guidelines for reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Two themes were generated, with each theme comprising three subthemes. Theme one represents the amplified burden arising from multimorbidity that leads to unique challenges for self-management, such as integrating multiple medications into daily life, accumulating new symptoms and treatments, and managing evolving medication regimens. Theme two represents pathways towards relief that reduce this burden and promote medication adherence, such as prioritising certain conditions and treatments, resigning to the need for multiple medications, and identifying and utilising adherence supports. CONCLUSIONS: We identified factors relevant to medication adherence for older adults with multimorbidity that go beyond single-disease influences and account for the amplified experience of chronic disease that multimorbidity can produce for some people. While evidence of single-disease influences remains fundamental to tailoring behavioural interventions to individuals, the impact of multimorbidity on medication adherence should be accounted for in research and practice.

Exploring barriers and facilitators of physical distancing in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study.

Background: Physical distancing measures (e.g., keeping a distance of two metres from others, avoiding crowded areas, and reducing the number of close physical contacts) continue to be among the most important preventative measures used to reduce the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID -19). Therefore, it is important to understand barriers and facilitators of physical distancing to help inform future public health campaigns. Methods: The current study aimed to qualitatively explore barriers and facilitators of physical distancing in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic using a qualitative interpretative design. Semi-structured one-to-one phone interviews were conducted with 25 participants aged 18+ years and living in the Republic of Ireland between September and October 2020. A purposive sampling strategy was used to maximise diversity in terms of age, gender, and socioeconomic status. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Analysis resulted in the development of six main themes related to barriers and facilitators of physical distancing: (1) Maintaining and negotiating close relationships; (2) Public environments support or discourage physical distancing; (3) Habituation to threat; (4) Taking risks to maintain well-being; (5) Personal responsibility to control the "controllables"; and (6) Confusion and uncertainty around government guidelines. Conclusions: Our study found that physical distancing measures are judged to be more or less difficult based on a number of internal and external psychosocial factors, including maintaining and negotiating close relationships, habituation to threat, risk compensation, structure of public environments, personal responsibility, and confusion or uncertainty around government guidelines. Given the diversity in our sample, it is clear that the identified barriers and facilitators vary depending on context and life stage. Messaging that targets sub-groups of the population may benefit from considering the identified themes in this analysis.

Prevalence and predictors of medication non-adherence among people living with multimorbidity: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to describe medication non-adherence among people living with multimorbidity according to the current literature, and synthesise predictors of non-adherence in this population. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses. PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched for relevant articles published in English language between January 2009 and April 2019. Quantitative studies reporting medication non-adherence and/or predictors of non-adherence among people with two or more chronic conditions were included in the review. A meta-analysis was conducted with a subgroup of studies that used an inclusive definition of multimorbidity to recruit participants, rather than seeking people with specific conditions. Remaining studies reporting prevalence and predictors of non-adherence were narratively synthesised. RESULTS: The database search produced 10 998 records and a further 75 were identified through other sources. Following full-text screening, 178 studies were included in the review. The range of reported non-adherence differed by measurement method, at 76.5% for self-report, 69.4% for pharmacy data, and 44.1% for electronic monitoring. A meta-analysis was conducted with eight studies (n=8949) that used an inclusive definition of multimorbidity to recruit participants. The pooled prevalence of non-adherence was 42.6% (95% CI: 34.0 - 51.3%, k=8, I2=97%, p<0.01). The overall range of non-adherence was 7.0%-83.5%. Frequently reported correlates of non-adherence included previous non-adherence and treatment-related beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: The review identified a heterogeneous literature in terms of conditions studied, and definitions and measures of non-adherence used. Results suggest that future attempts to improve adherence among people with multimorbidity should determine for which conditions individuals require most support. The variable levels of medication non-adherence highlight the need for more attention to be paid by healthcare providers to the impact of multimorbidity on chronic disease self-management. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019133849.

A Smartphone App to Support Adherence to Inhaled Corticosteroids in Young Adults With Asthma: Multi-Methods Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Young adults with asthma often report low adherence to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), leading to uncontrolled symptoms and poor disease outcomes. Technology-enabled digital supports such as mobile health (mHealth) asthma smartphone apps have the potential to support adherence to ICS and asthma self-management. There is a need for feasibility studies to determine the usability, acceptability, and feasibility of these interventions. In addition, it is essential to determine the feasibility of recruiting and retaining young adults to plan future efficacy and effectiveness trials and therefore, establish evidence-based asthma apps. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine (1) the feasibility of recruiting and retaining young adults to a trial and (2) the usability, acceptability, and feasibility of using the AsthmaMD app to support adherence to ICS in a population of young adults living with asthma. METHODS: A multi-methods feasibility study was conducted. Young adults aged 18-30 years with asthma and current prescription for ICS were eligible and invited to take part through a university circular email, social media, and general practice sites. Participation involved completing a baseline self-report questionnaire, downloading and using the AsthmaMD app for 2 weeks, and completing the follow-up assessment, including self-report and open-ended questions about participants' experience of using the app. Primary outcomes included participant recruitment and retention and the usability, acceptability, and feasibility of using AsthmaMD. Quantitative self-report data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative open-ended data were analyzed using inductive reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 122 young adults (females, n=101, 82.8%) with a mean age of 24.4 (SD 3.8) years were recruited and they completed baseline measures. Of the 122 young adults, 59 (48.4%) completed the study. The AsthmaMD app received a mean score of 63.1/100 (SD 20.1) on the System Usability Scale (ie, a standardized measure of usability for technology-based apps), and an overall user satisfaction score of 5.8/10 (SD 2.2). Of the 59 participants who completed the study, 49 (83%) participants used the app ≥1 day per week. Two main themes were identified in the qualitative analysis of user experiences: (1) learning how to use the app to suit the individual and (2) benefits and relevance of using the app. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study indicate that it is feasible to recruit and retain young adults to examine efficacy and effectiveness in a future trial and that young adults living with asthma may find AsthmaMD to be usable, acceptable, and feasible to support adherence to ICS. Our findings also identified opportunities to further optimize the usability of AsthmaMD and similar apps. Based on our findings, we recommend providing more accessible information on how to use the app and replacing medical terminology with simplified language within the app to improve usability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN11295269; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11295269.

Protocol for a process evaluation of an external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care: the PolyPrime study.

BACKGROUND: The PolyPrime intervention is a theory-based intervention aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people (aged ≥65 years) in primary care. The intervention consists of an online video which demonstrates how general practitioners (GPs) can prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient and a patient recall process, whereby patients are invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. The aim of the process evaluation is to further examine the implementation of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care. This will involve investigating whether the PolyPrime intervention can be delivered as intended across two healthcare systems, how acceptable the intervention is to GPs, practice staff and patients, and to identify the intervention's likely mechanisms of action. METHODS: The PolyPrime study is an external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) which aims to recruit 12 GP practices across Northern Ireland [NI] (n=6) and the six counties in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) that border NI (n=6). Practices have been randomised to intervention or usual care. An embedded process evaluation will assess intervention fidelity (i.e. was the intervention delivered as intended), acceptability of the intervention to GPs, practice staff and patients and potential mechanisms of action (i.e. what components of the intervention were perceived to be effective). Quantitative data will be collected from data collection forms completed by GPs and practice staff and a feedback questionnaire completed by patients from intervention arm practices, which will be analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with GPs and practice staff and audio-recordings of medication review appointments from the intervention arm practices which will be transcribed and analysed using the framework method. Quantitative and qualitative data will be triangulated to provide an overall assessment of intervention fidelity, intervention acceptability, and mechanisms of action. DISCUSSION: This process evaluation will add to feasibility data from the pilot cRCT by providing evidence on the fidelity of implementing the intervention package across two healthcare systems, the acceptability of the intervention and potential mechanisms of action. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ISRCTN41009897 . Registered on 19 November 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

A scoping review of research on the determinants of adherence to social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This scoping review focused on answering key questions about the focus, quality and generalisability of the quantitative evidence on the determinants of adherence to social distancing measures in research during the first wave of COVID-19. The review included 84 studies. The majority of included studies were conducted in Western Europe and the USA. Many lacked theoretical input, were at risk for bias, and few were experimental in design. The most commonly coded domains of the TDF in the included studies were 'Environmental Context and Resources' (388 codes across 76 studies), 'Beliefs about Consequences' (34 codes across 21 studies), 'Emotion' (28 codes across 12 studies), and 'Social Influences' (26 codes across 16 studies). The least frequently coded TDF domains included 'Optimism' (not coded), 'Intentions' (coded once), 'Goals' (2 codes across 2 studies), 'Reinforcement' (3 codes across 2 studies), and 'Behavioural Regulation' (3 codes across 3 studies). Examining the focus of the included studies identified a lack of studies on potentially important determinants of adherence such as reinforcement, goal setting and self-monitoring. The quality of the included studies was variable and their generalisablity was threatened by their reliance on convenience samples.

An external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care (PolyPrime): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The use of multiple medications (polypharmacy) is a concern in older people (≥65 years) and is associated with negative health outcomes. For older populations with multimorbidity, polypharmacy is the reality and the key challenge is ensuring appropriate polypharmacy (as opposed to inappropriate polypharmacy). This external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aims to further test a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care in two jurisdictions, Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). METHODS: Twelve GP practices across NI (n=6) and the six counties in the ROI that border NI will be randomised to either the intervention or usual care group. Members of the research team have developed an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change. The intervention consists of two components: (1) an online video which demonstrates how a GP may prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient and (2) a patient recall process, whereby patients are invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. Ten older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥4 medications) will be recruited per GP practice (n=120). GP practices allocated to the intervention arm will be asked to watch the online video and schedule medication reviews with patients on two occasions; an initial and a 6-month follow-up appointment. GP practices allocated to the control arm will continue to provide usual care to patients. The study will assess the feasibility of recruitment, retention and study procedures including collecting data on medication appropriateness (from GP records), quality of life and health service use (i.e. hospitalisations). An embedded process evaluation will assess intervention fidelity (i.e. was the intervention delivered as intended), acceptability of the intervention and potential mechanisms of action. DISCUSSION: This pilot cRCT will provide evidence of the feasibility of a range of study parameters such as recruitment and retention, data collection procedures and the acceptability of the intervention. Pre-specified progression criteria will also be used to determine whether or not to proceed to a definitive cRCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN41009897 . Registered 19 November 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

Prevalence and predictors of adherence to inhaled corticosteroids in young adults (15-30 years) with asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: Adherence to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) is an essential part of asthma management throughout the lifespan; however, this may be particularly challenging during the transition into adulthood. This systematic review aimed to determine the prevalence and predictors of adherence to ICS in emerging adulthood.Data sources: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Scopus, and CINAHL were searched with search terms for asthma, ICS, adherence, young adults, and predictors combined.Study selection: Studies with participants with diagnosed asthma, currently prescribed ICS, a mean age between 15 and 30 years and reporting the prevalence and/or assessing predictor(s) of adherence using quantitative methods were included.Results: Twenty-nine studies were identified for inclusion (K = 29, N = 187 401). A random effect meta-analysis revealed the pooled prevalence of adherence was 28% (95% CI = 20-38%, k = 16) in studies that provided quantitative information on adherence. Adherence was higher in studies with a mean age <18 years (36%; 95% CI = 36-37%, k = 4). Studies using self-report measures provided higher estimates of adherence (35%; 95% CI = 28-42%, k = 10) than studies using pharmacy refill data (20%; 95% CI = 9-38%, k = 6). A narrative review identified personality, illness perceptions, and treatment beliefs as potentially important predictors of adherence.Conclusion: Adherence is sub-optimal during emerging adulthood, particularly after age 18. More reliable and objective measures are needed to precisely characterize adherence. Greater research and practice attention to emerging adulthood are needed to guide self-management support in those living with asthma at this important lifespan stage.Systematic review registration number: CRD42018092401.

'I just take them because I know the people that give them to me': A theory-informed interview study of community-dwelling people with dementia and carers' perspectives of medicines management.

OBJECTIVE: Identify facilitators and barriers to successful medicines management for people with dementia (PwD) in primary care from the perspectives of community-dwelling PwD and carers. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews conducted with PwD and carers in Northern Ireland. The 14-domain Theoretical Domains Framework guided data collection and analysis. Interviews explored participants' experiences and perceptions of medicines management. PwD also completed the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire indicating their level of agreement with statements about medicines. Qualitative data were analysed using the framework method and content analysis. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Eighteen PwD and 15 carers were interviewed. PwD believed they were competent with medicines management ('beliefs about capabilities'). Most PwD reported having strategies to prompt them to take their medicines ('memory, attention and decision processes'). Carers played an important role in supporting PwD with medicines management ('social influences') and monitoring adherence ('behavioural regulation') and anticipated having to take on a greater role as patients' cognitive impairment worsened ('beliefs about consequences'). Participants highlighted assistance provided by community pharmacies with medicines acquisition and delivery ('environmental context and resources') and placed great trust in primary healthcare professionals ('social influences'). PwD had positive attitudes towards medication and believed strongly in the necessity of their medicines. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to use a theoretical approach to explore medicines management for community-dwelling PwD. The findings provide new insights into the critical role of carers in facilitating optimal medicines management and will inform future intervention development, in which carers' needs assessment and involvement will be key.

Patients' Experiences of Using Smartphone Apps to Support Self-Management and Improve Medication Adherence in Hypertension: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, hypertension control rates remain suboptimal despite clinically effective antihypertensive drug therapy. Patient failure to take medication as prescribed (ie, nonadherence) is the most important factor contributing to poor control. Smartphone apps can facilitate the delivery of evidence-based behavior change techniques to improve adherence and may provide a scalable, usable, and feasible method to deliver self-management support. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to explore patients' experiences of the usability and feasibility of smartphone apps to support self-management and improve medication adherence in hypertension. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted. A total of 11 people living with hypertension from the West of Ireland were sampled purposively and interviewed about their experience of using a self-management app for a 4-week period, which included two key functionalities: self-monitoring of blood pressure (BP) and medication reminders. Thematic analysis was carried out on the semistructured interview data. RESULTS: Participants' age ranged from 43 to 74 years (mean 62 years, SD 9.13). Three themes were identified: digital empowerment of self-management, human versus digital systems, and digital sustainability. Although patients' experience of using the technology to self-monitor BP was one of empowerment, characterized by an enhanced insight and understanding into their condition, control, and personal responsibility, the reminder function was only feasible for patients who reported unintentional nonadherence to treatment. Patients experienced the app as a sustainable tool to support self-management and found it easy to use, including those with limited technological competence. CONCLUSIONS: The study's findings provide new insights into the experience of using apps to support medication adherence in hypertension. Overall, the data support apps as a usable and feasible method to aid self-management of hypertension and highlight the need for personalized functionality, particularly with regard to medication adherence reminder strategies. The study's findings challenge the perspective that the use of these technologies to support self-management can inevitably add to the burden of treatment experienced by patients.

Improving medicines management for people with dementia in primary care: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals to develop a theory-informed intervention.

BACKGROUND: People with dementia (PwD) face unique challenges with medicines management, yet little is known about these challenges from the perspectives of primary healthcare professionals, particularly general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists. Few medicines management interventions have been developed which are aimed at community-dwelling PwD. This study sought to develop an intervention to improve medicines management for PwD in primary care using a theory-informed approach. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs (n = 15) and community pharmacists (n = 15) to explore participants' views and experiences of medicines management for PwD, and their perceptions of barriers and facilitators to successful medicines management for PwD. The 14-domain Theoretical Domains Framework was the underpinning theoretical guide, allowing key theoretical domains to be identified and mapped to behaviour change techniques (BCTs) which are considered the 'active ingredients' of an intervention. Draft interventions were developed to operationalise selected BCTs and were presented to GPs and community pharmacists during task groups. Final selection of an intervention for feasibility testing was guided by feedback provided during these task groups and through application of the APEASE (Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness/cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects/safety, Equity) criteria. RESULTS: Participants expressed a number of concerns about medicines management for PwD, particularly monitoring adherence to medication regimens and conducting medication review. Two draft interventions comprising selected BCTs ('Modelling or demonstration of behaviour'; 'Salience of consequences'; 'Health consequences'; 'Social and environmental consequences'; 'Action planning'; Social support or encouragement', 'Self-monitoring of behaviour') were developed, each targeting GPs and community pharmacists. Following the task groups and discussions within the research team, the community pharmacy-based intervention was selected for future feasibility testing. The intervention will target community pharmacists to conduct a medication review (incorporating an adherence check) with a PwD, delivered as an online video demonstrating key behaviours. The video will include feedback emphasising positive outcomes of performing the behaviours. Action planning and a quick reference guide will be used as complementary intervention components. CONCLUSIONS: A community pharmacist-based intervention has been developed targeting medicines management for PwD in primary care using a systematic, theory-informed approach. Future work will determine the usability and acceptability of implementing this intervention in clinical practice.

Identifying and addressing psychosocial determinants of adherence to physical distancing guidance during the COVID-19 pandemic - project protocol.

Optimising public health physical distancing measures has been a critical part of the global response to the spread of COVID-19. Evidence collected during the current pandemic shows that the transmission rate of the virus is significantly reduced following implementation of intensive physical distancing measures. Adherence to these recommendations has been poorer than adherence to other key transmission reduction behaviours such as handwashing. There are a complex range of reasons that are likely to predict why people do not or only partially adhere to physical distancing recommendations. In the current project we aim to address the following research questions: (1) What are the psychosocial determinants of physical distancing for the general public and for key socio-demographic sub-groups (e.g., young adults, older adults, etc.)?; (2) Do current Government of Ireland COVID-19 physical distancing communications address the determinants of physical distancing?; and (3) How can communications be optimised and tailored to sub-groups to ensure maximum adherence to guidelines? These will be addressed by conducting three work packages (WPs). In WP1, we will work closely with the iCARE international study, which includes a large online survey of public responses to measures established to reduce and slow the spread of COVID-19, including physical distancing. We will analyse Irish data, comparing it to data from other countries, to identify the key psychosocial determinants of physical distancing behaviour. This will be followed by a qualitative study to explore in depth the barriers and facilitators of physical distancing behaviour among the Irish public (WP2). In WP3, we will conduct a content analysis and evidence mapping of current government messaging around physical distancing, to ensure the findings from this research feed into the development of ongoing communication and future messaging about physical distancing.

A qualitative comparison of high and low adherers with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension.

Poor adherence is a leading cause of apparent resistance to antihypertensive treatment. Recent empirical research has investigated predictors of adherence for primary care patients who are apparently resistant to treatment; however, questions remain regarding the variability in adherence behaviour among this group. This study aimed to investigate factors that may elucidate medication adherence among patients with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH) using qualitative methods. Fourteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients undergoing treatment for aTRH in primary care in the West of Ireland. Patients who self-reported both high and low adherence in a previous quantitative study were purposively sampled. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. A public and patient involvement research group were active partners in developing the study protocol and interview topic guide. Three major themes were identified: beliefs about treatment, habits and routine, and health and health systems. High adherers reported favourable beliefs about antihypertensive treatment that had been validated by experience with taking the treatment over time, described strong medication-taking habits and stable routines, and positive relations with their GP. Low adherers expressed less coherence in their beliefs and used less effective strategies to support their medication-taking in daily life. The current findings are consistent with qualitative studies of adherence in other chronic conditions. Results reflect the difficulty for healthcare practitioners in identifying adherent versus non-adherent patients via conversation, and highlight the importance of accurate adherence assessment. Inception studies may provide an opportunity to better understand adherence behaviour across the illness trajectory.

Comparative efficacy of exercise and anti-hypertensive pharmacological interventions in reducing blood pressure in people with hypertension: A network meta-analysis.

AIMS: This analysis aims to estimate the comparative efficacy of anti-hypertensive medications and exercise interventions on systolic and diastolic blood pressure reduction in people with hypertension. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted focusing on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise interventions and first-line anti-hypertensives where blood pressure reduction was the primary outcome in those with hypertension. Network meta-analyses were conducted to generate estimates of comparative efficacy. RESULTS: We identified 93 RCTs (N = 32,404, mean age in RCTs: 39-70 years) which compared placebo or usual care with first-line antihypertensives including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers and thiazide-like diuretics and exercise interventions including aerobic training and dynamic resistance training. Of these, there were 81 (87%) trials related to medications (n = 31,347, 97%) and 12 (13%) trials related to exercise (n = 1057, 3%). The point estimates suggested that antihypertensive medications were more effective than exercise but there was insufficient evidence to suggest that first-line medications significantly reduced blood pressure to a greater extent than did the exercise interventions. Of the first-line treatments, angiotensin receptor blockers and calcium channel blockers had the highest treatment ranking, while exercise had the second lowest treatment ranking, followed by control conditions. CONCLUSION: The current evidence base with a bias towards medication research may partly explain the circumspection around the efficacy of exercise in guidelines and practice. Clinicians may justifiably consider exercise for low risk hypertension patients who confirm a preference for such an approach.

Measuring adherence to therapy in apparent treatment-resistant hypertension: a feasibility study in Irish primary care.

BACKGROUND: Apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH) is defined as uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) in patients taking three or more antihypertensive medications. Some patients will have true treatment-resistant hypertension, some undiagnosed secondary hypertension, while others have pseudo-resistance. Pseudo-resistance occurs when non-adherence to medication, white-coat hypertension (WCH), lifestyle, and inadequate drug dosing are responsible for the poorly controlled BP. AIM: To examine the feasibility of establishing non-adherence to medication, for the first time in primary care, using mass spectrometry urine analysis. Operationalisation would be established by at least 50% of patients participating and 95% of samples being suitable for analysis. Clinical importance would be confirmed by >10% of patients being non-adherent. DESIGN AND SETTING: Eligible patients with aTRH (n = 453) in 15 university research-affiliated Irish general practices were invited to participate. METHOD: Participants underwent mass spectrometry urine analysis to test adherence and ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) to examine WCH. RESULTS: Of the eligible patients invited, 52% (n = 235) participated. All 235 urine samples (100%) were suitable for analysis: 174 (74%) patients were fully adherent, 56 (24%) partially adherent, and five (2%) fully non-adherent to therapy. A total of 206 patients also had ABPM, and in total 92 (45%) were categorised as pseudo-resistant. No significant associations were found between adherence status and patient characteristics or drug class. CONCLUSION: In patients with aTRH, the authors have established that it is feasible to examine non-adherence to medications using mass spectrometry urine analysis. One in four patients were found to be partially or fully non-adherent. Further research on how to incorporate this approach into individual patient consultations and its associated cost-effectiveness is now appropriate.

The development of a Core Outcome Set for medicines management interventions for people with dementia in primary care.

BACKGROUND: people with dementia (PWD), and their carers, face challenges with medicines management activities. As interventions to support medicines management for PWD are developed, consideration must be given to the outcomes chosen to measure their effectiveness. A Core Outcome Set (COS) is a minimum set of outcomes to be measured in all trials in a particular clinical area, which seeks to reduce heterogeneity of outcome reporting across trials. OBJECTIVE: to develop a COS for trials assessing the effectiveness of medicines management interventions for PWD in primary care. METHODS: a comprehensive list of outcomes was compiled through a systematic review and semi-structured interviews with PWD (n = 18), their carers (n = 15), community pharmacists (n = 15) and general practitioners (n = 15). These outcomes were rated by a Delphi panel (n = 52) on a nine-point Likert scale from 1 (limited importance) to 9 (critical) during three sequential rounds of questionnaire distribution. The Delphi panel comprised participants with expertise in dementia and medicines management, including academics and healthcare professionals. An outcome was eligible for inclusion in the COS if ≥70% of participants rated it critical and <15% of participants rated it of limited importance. RESULTS: twenty-nine outcomes identified from the systematic review and stakeholder interviews were presented to the Delphi panel. Consensus was reached on 21 outcomes, of which the 7 most highly rated were recommended for inclusion in the COS. CONCLUSION: this study used robust methodology to develop a COS for medicines management interventions for PWD. Future work should identify the most appropriate tools to measure these outcomes.