Barriers and Facilitators of Using Sensored Medication Adherence Devices in a Diverse Sample of Patients With Multiple Myeloma: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Many recently approved medications to manage multiple myeloma (MM) are oral, require supportive medications to prevent adverse effects, and are taken under complex schedules. Medication adherence is a concern; however, little attention has been directed toward understanding adherence in MM or associated barriers and facilitators. Advanced sensored medication devices (SMDs) offer opportunities to intervene; however, acceptability among patients with MM, particularly African American patients, is untested. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore patients' (1) perceptions of their health before MM including experiences with chronic medications, (2) perceptions of adherence barriers and facilitators, and (3) attitudes toward using SMDs. METHODS: An in-person, semistructured, qualitative interview was conducted with a convenience sample of patients being treated for MM. Patients were recruited from within an urban, minority-serving, academic medical center that had an established cancer center. A standardized interview guide included questions targeting medication use, attitudes, adherence, barriers, and facilitators. Demographics included the use of cell phone technology. Patients were shown 2 different pill bottles with sensor technology-Medication Event Monitoring System and the SMRxT bottle. After receiving information on the transmission ability of the bottles, patients were asked to discuss their reactions and concerns with the idea of using such a device. Medical records were reviewed to capture information on medication and diagnoses. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Interviews were independently coded by 2 members of the team with a third member providing guidance. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients with a mean age of 56 years (median=59 years; range=29-71 years) participated in this study and 80% (16/20) were African American. In addition, 18 (90%, 18/20) owned a smartphone and 85% (17/20) were comfortable using the internet, text messaging, and cell phone apps. The average number of medications reported per patient was 13 medications (median=10; range=3-24). Moreover, 14 (70%, 14/20) patients reported missed doses for a range of reasons such as fatigue, feeling ill, a busy schedule, forgetting, or side effects. Interest in using an SMD ranged from great interest to complete lack of interest. Examples of concerns related to the SMDs included privacy issues, potential added cost, and the size of the bottle (ie, too large). Despite the concerns, 60% (12/20) of the patients expressed interest in trying a bottle in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Results identified numerous patient-reported barriers and facilitators to missed doses of oral anticancer therapy. Many appear to be potentially mutable if uncovered and addressed. SMDs may allow for capture of these data. Although patients expressed concerns with SMDs, most remained willing to use one. A feasibility trial with SMDs is planned.

Assessment of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis in Orthopaedics and Traumatology Surgical Unit of a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in Addis Ababa.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic antimicrobials have a starring role in prevention of surgical site infection. This study assesses the practice of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SAP) and development of surgical site infection (SSI) based on patient chart review in patients who underwent surgery in the Orthopaedics and Traumatology Surgical Unit of Tikur Anbesa Specialized Hospital (TASH). RESULTS: Majority of the patients 144 (72%) were males. 108 (54%) of the surgical wounds were clean and 63 (31%) were clean contaminated. 160 (80%) patients received preoperative prophylaxis, of these 153 (96%) received postoperative prophylaxis as well. 34 (17%) patients did not receive preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis, while 6 (3%) patients had no record about preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. Among those who received preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis the time of administration was not recorded in 87 (54%) of the patient charts and 36 (23%) patients had preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis greater than 2 h prior to incision. Among the 188 (94%) patients that received postoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis; the duration of administration was more than 72 h in 114 (61%) patients, while only 8 (4%) received for less than 24 h after surgery. Ceftriaxone 309 (70%) was the most prescribed agent for prophylaxis. 32 (16%) patients developed surgical site of infection. Using odds ratio age equal to or above 50, clean contaminated and contaminated surgical wounds were not statistically associated with increased risk of SSI. CONCLUSION: Most patients who underwent surgery received prophylactic antimicrobials; nevertheless, the practice was not aligned with standard guidelines' recommendations and patients developed surgical site infections.

Validation of the Amharic Version of the M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory and Assessment of Symptoms in Ethiopian Cancer Patients.

CONTEXT: Cancer patients often face a variety of symptoms that impact their quality of life. The management of these symptoms is highly dependent on the accurate appraisal of their severity through the use of a standardized symptom assessment tool. The M. D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI), developed in English, is one of such tools that contain 13 core cancer related symptoms that can easily be rated on a scale of 0-10. OBJECTIVES: The present study tried to develop and validate the Amharic language version of the MDASI (MDASI-Am). METHODS: The MDASI-Am was developed by the standard forward/backward translation of the original English version of the MDASI. The MDASI-Am was completed by or administered to 145 randomly selected Ethiopian cancer patients. Factor analysis, Cronbach α coefficient, and mean comparison, respectively, were used to establish construct validity, internal consistency, and known-group validity (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status). RESULTS: Factor analysis identified three symptom constructs interpreted as general, gastrointestinal, and neuropsychiatric symptoms, with Cronbach α coefficients of 0.70, 0.80, and 0.82, respectively. The MDASI-Am significantly detected differences in symptom severity and interference levels in patient groups categorized according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (P < 0.01), establishing known-group validity. The most prevalent severe symptoms identified in the current sample were pain, sadness, numbness, distress, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: The MDASI-Am is a valid and reliable tool for measuring symptom severity and symptom interference with daily living in Ethiopian cancer patients.