Investigating preferences for support with life after stroke: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence of service user preferences to guide the commissioning and improvement of services that support life after stroke. We report the first investigation of patients' and family carers' preferences for community services after stroke using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). METHODS: Two workshops with patients and family carers (n = 8) explored stroke experiences, identifying attributes important in shaping views about service design, and piloted data collection strategies. Attributes were group versus individual support; service provider; additional support for social and leisure activities; and the total time required to access services. Patients and family carers were recruited six months post stroke-onset (mean 331 days) from four stroke services, and invited to participate in the DCE. Patients' general health (EQ5D) and functional dependence (Barthel Index) were also assessed. Of 474 eligible patients, 144 (30%) expressed an interest in the study, and 80 (56%) of these completed the survey questionnaire. 34 of 74 (46%) family carers recruited through patients completed the DCE. RESULTS: All four attributes were significant in shaping patients preferences for stroke support service delivery (p < 0.05), confirming the interpretation of workshop findings. Patients prefer help and support for emotional needs, communication problems and physical difficulties to be provided on an individual basis; and to be offered additional social and leisure activities that they are able to attend on their own. Patients would appear to prefer that voluntary organisations do not provide these services, although this may be linked to lack of experience of these services. Family carers would prefer help and support in their caring role on a one-to-one basis. Whilst health related quality of life is associated with preference for format of service, results were relatively consistent across sub-groups, with the exception of time since stroke, where social and leisure activities had a greater impact on preferences of established service users. CONCLUSIONS: The data provide unique insights into how preferences for community services that support life after stroke are shaped. This information can be used to inform both service re-design, and barriers to implementation that will need to be accounted for in policy shifts towards a more mixed economy of service provision.

Identification and assessment of adherence-enhancing interventions in studies assessing medication adherence through electronically compiled drug dosing histories: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to medications is prevalent across all medical conditions that include ambulatory pharmacotherapy and is thus a major barrier to achieving the benefits of otherwise effective medicines. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to identify and to compare the efficacy of strategies and components thereof that improve implementation of the prescribed drug dosing regimen and maintain long-term persistence, based on quantitative evaluation of effect sizes across the aggregated trials. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials that tested the efficacy of adherence-enhancing strategies with self-administered medications. The searches were limited to papers in the English language and were included from database inception to 31 December 2011. STUDY SELECTION: Our review included randomized controlled trials in which adherence was assessed by electronically compiled drug dosing histories. Five thousand four hundred studies were screened. Eligibility assessment was performed independently by two reviewers. A structured data collection sheet was developed to extract data from each study. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The adherence-enhancing components were classified in eight categories. Quality of the papers was assessed using the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines to assess potential bias. A combined adherence outcome was derived from the different adherence variables available in the studies by extracting from each paper the available adherence summary variables in a pre-defined order (correct dosing, taking adherence, timing adherence, percentage of adherent patients). To study the association between the adherence-enhancing components and their effect on adherence, a linear meta-regression model, based on mean adherence point estimates, and a meta-analysis were conducted. RESULTS: Seventy-nine clinical trials published between 1995 and December 2011 were included in the review. Patients randomized to an intervention group had an average combined adherence outcome of 74.3 %, which was 14.1 % higher than in patients randomized to the control group (60.2 %). The linear meta-regression analysis with stepwise variable selection estimated an 8.8 % increase in adherence when the intervention included feedback to the patients of their recent dosing history (EM-feedback) (p < 0.01) and a 5.0 % increase in adherence when the intervention included a cognitive-educational component (p = 0.02). In addition, the effect of interventions on adherence decreased by 1.1 % each month. Sensitivity analysis by selecting only high-quality papers confirmed the robustness of the model. The random effects model in the meta-analysis, conducted on 48 studies, confirmed the above findings and showed that the improvement in adherence was 19.8 % (95 % CI 10.7-28.9 %) among patients receiving EM-feedback, almost double the improvement in adherence for studies that did not include this type of feedback [10.3 % (95 % CI 7.5-13.1 %)] (p < 0.01). The improvement in adherence was 16.1 % (95 % CI 10.7-21.6 %) in studies that tested cognitive-educational components versus 10.1 % (95 % CI 6.6-13.6 %) in studies that did not include this type of intervention (p = 0.04). Among 57 studies measuring clinical outcomes, only 8 reported a significant improvement in clinical outcome. LIMITATIONS: Despite a common measurement, the meta-analysis was limited by the heterogeneity of the pooled data and the different measures of medication adherence. The funnel plot showed a possible publication bias in studies with high variability of the intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the statistical heterogeneity among the studies identified, and potential publication bias, the evidence from our meta-analysis suggests that EM-feedback and cognitive-educational interventions are potentially effective approaches to enhance patient adherence to medications. The limitations of this research highlight the urgent need to define guidelines and study characteristics for research protocols that can guide researchers in designing studies to assess the effects of adherence-enhancing interventions.

A new taxonomy for describing and defining adherence to medications.

Interest in patient adherence has increased in recent years, with a growing literature that shows the pervasiveness of poor adherence to appropriately prescribed medications. However, four decades of adherence research has not resulted in uniformity in the terminology used to describe deviations from prescribed therapies. The aim of this review was to propose a new taxonomy, in which adherence to medications is conceptualized, based on behavioural and pharmacological science, and which will support quantifiable parameters. A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and PsycINFO from database inception to 1 April 2009. The objective was to identify the different conceptual approaches to adherence research. Definitions were analyzed according to time and methodological perspectives. A taxonomic approach was subsequently derived, evaluated and discussed with international experts. More than 10 different terms describing medication-taking behaviour were identified through the literature review, often with differing meanings. The conceptual foundation for a new, transparent taxonomy relies on three elements, which make a clear distinction between processes that describe actions through established routines ('Adherence to medications', 'Management of adherence') and the discipline that studies those processes ('Adherence-related sciences'). 'Adherence to medications' is the process by which patients take their medication as prescribed, further divided into three quantifiable phases: 'Initiation', 'Implementation' and 'Discontinuation'. In response to the proliferation of ambiguous or unquantifiable terms in the literature on medication adherence, this research has resulted in a new conceptual foundation for a transparent taxonomy. The terms and definitions are focused on promoting consistency and quantification in terminology and methods to aid in the conduct, analysis and interpretation of scientific studies of medication adherence.

A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of thiopurine methyltransferase genotyping prior to azathioprine treatment: the TARGET study.

AIM: To conduct a pragmatic, randomized controlled trial to assess whether thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) genotyping prior to azathioprine reduces adverse drug reactions (ADRs). METHODS: A total of 333 participants were randomized 1:1 to undergo TPMT genotyping prior to azathioprine or to commence treatment without genotyping. RESULTS: There was no difference in the primary outcome of stopping azathioprine due to an adverse reaction (ADR, p = 0.59) between the two study arms. ADRs were more common in older patients (p = 0.01). There was no increase in stopping azathioprine due to ADRs in TPMT heterozygotes compared with wild-type individuals. The single individual with TPMT variant homozygosity experienced severe neutropenia. CONCLUSION: Our work supports the strong evidence that individuals with TPMT variant homozygosity are at high risk of severe neutropenia, whereas TPMT heterozygotes are not at increased risk of ADRs at standard doses of azathioprine.

Valuing pharmacogenetic testing services: a comparison of patients' and health care professionals' preferences.

OBJECTIVE: The study compared the preferences of patients and health-care professionals for the key attributes of a pharmacogenetic testing service to identify a patient's risk of developing a side effect (neutropenia) from the immunosuppressant, azathioprine. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was posted to a sample of patients (n=309) and health-care professionals (HCPs) (n=410), as part of the TARGET study. Five attributes, with four levels each, described the service as follows: level of information given; predictive ability of the test; how the sample is collected; turnaround time for a result; who explains the test result. Data from each sample were first analyzed separately and responses were compared by 1) identifying the impact of the scale parameter, and 2) estimating marginal rates of substitution. RESULTS: The final analysis included 159 patients and 138 HCPs (50% & 34% response rates). Estimated attribute coefficients from the patient and HCP sample differed in size, after taking into account the impact of the scale parameter. Patients and HCPs had similar preferences for predictive accuracy of the test and were willing to wait 2 days for a 1% improvement in test accuracy. Patients preferred to obtain more information and were willing to wait 19 days compared to 8 days for HCPs for providing higher levels of information. CONCLUSIONS: Patients demanded accurate and timely information from health-care professionals about why it was necessary to have a pharmacogenetic test and what the test results mean. In contrast, health-care professionals appear to focus more exclusively or entirely upon the predictive accuracy and waiting time for a test result.

Patients' and healthcare professionals' views on pharmacogenetic testing and its future delivery in the NHS.

INTRODUCTION: There is limited empirical evidence on patients' and healthcare professionals' views on the provision of pharmacogenetic testing services. These opinions may be used to shape the development of emerging pharmacogenetic services and inform healthcare professionals' future educational requirements. OBJECTIVES: To explore patients' and healthcare professionals' views about pharmacogenetic testing services and their future development. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients who had been prescribed azathioprine for autoimmune conditions and prevention of acute rejection in renal transplantation. Focus groups were conducted with a range of healthcare professionals. Interviews and focus groups were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: The views of 42 individuals - 25 patients and 17 healthcare professionals - were explored in depth. Key themes emerging from the data were: patients' and healthcare professionals' knowledge and experience of pharmacogenetics; expectations about how such a testing service could be used; and characteristics of service delivery. Knowledge and experience of pharmacogenetics varied. Pharmacogenetics was perceived to be of benefit by both groups. Patients gave opinions about pharmacogenetic services based on their experiences of illness, taking medicines and using healthcare services. Healthcare professionals based their opinions on how existing services are provided and access to limited healthcare resources. Patients had strong feelings about how this service should be delivered and expected high standards of explanation about potential pharmacogenetic tests. None of the healthcare professionals questioned expected to have responsibility for the future delivery of pharmacogenetic testing services. CONCLUSION: There is no clear model of how pharmacogenetic tests will be delivered in clinical practice. Patients expect to receive pharmacogenetic services from healthcare professionals who are able to explain the test, and interpret the implications for prescribing, with confidence. The gap between patients' high expectations for information and healthcare professionals' current knowledge and reluctance to deliver pharmacogenetic services highlights the urgent need for better education and training of healthcare professionals in pharmacogenetics.

Is shared care with annual hospital review better value for money than predominantly hospital-based care in patients with established stable rheumatoid arthritis?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost effectiveness and cost effectiveness acceptability of symptom control delivered by shared care (SCSC) and aggressive treatment delivered in hospital (ATH) for established rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Economic data were collected within the British Rheumatoid Outcome Study Group randomised controlled trial of SCSC and ATH. A broad perspective was used (UK National Health Service, social support services and patients). Cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, net benefit statistics and cost effectiveness acceptability curves were estimated. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. Sensitivity analysis tested the robustness of the results to analytical assumptions. RESULTS: The mean (SD) cost per person was 4540 pounds (4700) in the SCSC group and 4440 pounds (4900) in the ATH group. The mean (SD) QALYs per person for 3 years were 1.67 (0.56) in the SCSC group and 1.60 (0.60) in the ATH group. If decision makers are prepared to pay > or = 2000 pounds to gain 1 QALY, SCSC is likely to be cost effective in 60-90% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: The primary economic analysis and sensitivity analyses indicate that SCSC is likely to be more cost effective than ATH in 60-90% of cases. This result seems to be robust to assumptions required by the analysis. This study is one of a limited number of randomised controlled trials to collect detailed resource use and health status data and estimate the costs and QALYs of treatment for established RA. This trial is one of the largest RA studies to use the EuroQol.