Methods for Measuring Multiple Medication Adherence: A Systematic Review-Report of the ISPOR Medication Adherence and Persistence Special Interest Group.

BACKGROUND: A broad literature base exists for measuring medication adherence to monotherapeutic regimens, but publications are less extensive for measuring adherence to multiple medications. OBJECTIVES: To identify and characterize the multiple medication adherence (MMA) methods used in the literature. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, PsycINFO, the International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and the Cochrane Library databases on methods used to measure MMA published between January 1973 and May 2015. A two-step screening process was used; all abstracts were screened by pairs of researchers independently, followed by a full-text review identifying the method for calculating MMA. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed to conduct this systematic review. For studies that met the eligibility criteria, general study and adherence-specific characteristics and the number and type of MMA measurement methods were summarized. RESULTS: The 147 studies that were included originated from 32 countries, in 13 disease states. Of these studies, 26 used proportion of days covered, 23 used medication possession ratio, and 72 used self-reported questionnaires (e.g., the Morisky Scale) to assess MMA. About 50% of the studies included more than one method for measuring MMA, and different variations of medication possession ratio and proportion of days covered were used for measuring MMA. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be no standardized method to measure MMA. With an increasing prevalence of polypharmacy, more efforts should be directed toward constructing robust measures suitable to evaluate adherence to complex regimens. Future research to understand the validity and reliability of MMA measures and their effects on objective clinical outcomes is also needed.

The Humanistic Burden of Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC): A Systematic Review of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) Literature.

Background: Little is known about the humanistic burden of small cell lung cancer (SCLC), specifically the impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The aim of this systematic literature review was to explore the impact of SCLC on HRQoL and the patient reported outcomes (PROs) used to capture this impact. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of Medline®, Embase, and PsycINFO, oncology organization websites and conference proceedings within the past 10 years. Articles reporting HRQoL outcomes of SCLC patients were selected. Results: Twenty-seven eligible publications were identified. Global or overall impact on HRQoL (n = 21) was reported most often, with considerably fewer reporting individual domains that comprise HRQoL. Results indicated that HRQoL was negatively impacted in SCLC patients in comparison to the normal population in most domains. Overall, the domains measuring physical functioning and activities of daily living were most impacted. However, results on cognitive and emotional functioning were inconclusive. The impact on HRQoL may be least in both limited disease and extensive disease (ED) SCLC patients who have responded to treatment, and greatest in ED patients who were treatment naïve. The most frequently used PROs were the EORTC QLQ-C30 core cancer instruments, the lung cancer specific module the EORTC QLQ-LC13, LCSS, and EQ-5D. Conclusion: There exists a paucity of reporting on SCLC HRQoL outcomes. This extends to the reporting of domain level scores and by patient sub-group. Greater reporting at a granular level is recommended to allow for more robust conclusions to be made.

Association between Health-Related Quality of Life and Medication Adherence in Pulmonary Tuberculosis in South Africa.

Background: Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and adherence to treatment are two often inter-related concepts that have implications for patient management and care. Tuberculosis (TB) and its treatment present a major public health concern in South Africa. The study aimed to evaluate the association between HRQOL and adherence in TB patients in South Africa. Methods: Four self-reported HRQOL and one self-reported adherence measures were used in an observational longitudinal multicentre study during 6-month standard TB treatment. These included the generic Short-Form 12 items (SF-12) and European Quality of Life 5 dimensions 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L), the disease-specific St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and the condition-specific Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) for HRQOL. Adherence was measured by the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale 8 items (MMAS-8). The relationship between both concepts was examined in 131 patients using Spearman's rho correlations, and linear regression models. Results: HRQOL improved over 6-month TB treatment, whereas adherence mean scores stayed constant with participants attaining a medium average level. Around 76% of patients reported to be high adherers and 24% were reporting a medium or low adherence. Associations between HRQOL and adherence were mainly weak. High adherence at treatment start was positively related to improvements in anxiety and depression after 6-month treatment. The overall improvement in pain and discomfort, and psychosocial health aspects over treatment time was positively, but weakly associated with adherence at 6 months of treatment. Conclusion: A positive relationship exists between adherence and HRQOL in TB in a South African setting, but this relationship was very weak, most likely because HRQOL is affected by a number of different factors and not limited to effects of adherence. Therefore, management of TB patients should, besides adequate drug treatment, address the specific mental and psychosocial needs.

Development of a Consensus Statement for the Definition, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Acute Exacerbations of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Using the Delphi Technique.

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of agreed and established guidelines for the treatment of acute exacerbations of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (AE-IPF). This reflects, in part, the limited evidence-base underpinning the management of AE-IPF. In the absence of high-quality evidence, the aim of this research was to develop a clinician-led consensus statement for the definition, diagnosis and treatment of AE-IPF. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to obtain published material on the definition and treatment of AE-IPF. The results of this review were circulated to an online panel of clinicians for review. Statements were then shared with ten expert respiratory clinicians who regularly treat patients with IPF. A Delphi technique was then used to develop a consensus statement for the definition, diagnosis and treatment of AE-IPF. During the first round of review, clinicians rated the clarity of each statement, the extent to which the statement should be included and provided comments. In two subsequent rounds of review, clinicians were provided with the group median inclusion rating for each statement, and any revised wording of statements to aid clarity. Clinicians were asked to repeat the clarity and inclusion ratings for the revised statements. RESULTS: The literature review, online panel discussion, and face-to-face meeting generated 65 statements covering the definition, diagnosis, and management of AE-IPF. Following three rounds of blind review, 90% of clinicians agreed 39 final statements. These final statements included a definition of AE-IPF, approach to diagnosis, and treatment options, specifically: supportive measures, use of anti-microbials, immunosuppressants, anti-coagulants, anti-fibrotic therapy, escalation, transplant management, and long-term management including discharge planning. CONCLUSION: This clinician-led consensus statement establishes the 'best practice' for the management and treatment of AE-IPF based on current knowledge, evidence, and available treatments.

Treatment preference, adherence and outcomes in patients with cancer: literature review and development of a theoretical model.

OBJECTIVE: A patient's preference may guide their behavior and influence their willingness to take medication or undergo treatment affecting outcomes, such as health-related quality of life, or survival. The importance of understanding patient preferences within oncology is unclear and few adherence studies exist compared with other therapeutic areas. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was designed to review the literature regarding patient preferences, adherence and their link to outcomes specifically in the oncology setting and to propose a theoretical model. An in-depth review was conducted, using Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases to search for published data examining patient preference, adherence and oncology-specific outcomes, from 1982-2012. Articles were reviewed independently by two authors and rated for relevance and quality. Information from high-quality articles and discussion with oncology and patient preference experts were used to identify associations between important individual concepts as a basis for a theoretical model. RESULTS: In total, 1362 abstracts were identified. After removal of duplicates and initial review, 1269 were excluded and 93 reviewed in detail. Of these publications, 18 were deemed 'high-quality' and used to develop the final model. Variables associated with patient preference, adherence and outcome were identified. External variables included communication, treatment and mode of administration; patient beliefs and values were identified as cognitive variables; and adherence was attributed as a behavioral variable. Relationships between patient preference, adherence and clinical outcomes were established. Adverse events had a strong relationship with adherence; patient beliefs and values were identified as having a moderating effect on adherence. Adherence behavior had a direct relationship to outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Improving our understanding of patient preference may improve clinical outcomes in oncology patients. Although the proposed theoretical model is limited, it provides a basis to develop testable hypotheses for the relationships between patient preference, adherence and outcomes specific to oncology.