Improving the assessment of medication adherence: Challenges and considerations with a focus on low-resource settings.

Saurav Basu, Suneela Garg, Nandini Sharma, M Meghachandra Singh
{"title":"Improving the assessment of medication adherence: Challenges and considerations with a focus on low-resource settings.","authors":"Saurav Basu, Suneela Garg, Nandini Sharma, M Meghachandra Singh","doi":"10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_177_18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Improving patient survival and quality of life in chronic diseases requires prolonged and often lifelong medication intake. Less than half of patients with chronic diseases globally are adherent to their prescribed medications which preclude the full benefit of treatment, worsens therapeutic outcomes, accelerates disease progression, and causes enormous economic losses. The accurate assessment of medication adherence is pivotal for both researchers and clinicians. Medication adherence can be assessed through both direct and indirect measures. Indirect measures include both subjective (self-report measures such as questionnaire and interview) and objective (pill count and secondary database analysis) measures and constitute the mainstay of assessing medication adherence. However, the lack of an inexpensive, ubiquitous, universal gold standard for assessment of medication adherence emphasizes the need to utilize a combination of measures to differentiate adherent and nonadherent patients. The global heterogeneity in health systems precludes the development of a universal guideline for evaluating medication adherence. Methods based on the secondary database analysis are mostly ineffectual in low-resource settings lacking electronic pharmacy and insurance databases and allowing refills without updated, valid prescriptions from private pharmacies. This significantly restricts the choices for assessing adherence until digitization of medical data takes root in much of the developing world. Nevertheless, there is ample scope for improving self-report measures of adherence. Effective interview techniques, especially accounting for suboptimal patient health literacy, validation of adherence questionnaires, and avoiding conceptual fallacies in reporting adherence can improve the assessment of medication adherence and promote understanding of its causal factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":72593,"journal":{"name":"Ci ji yi xue za zhi = Tzu-chi medical journal","volume":"31 2","pages":"73-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/05/ad/TCMJ-31-73.PMC6450154.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ci ji yi xue za zhi = Tzu-chi medical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_177_18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Improving patient survival and quality of life in chronic diseases requires prolonged and often lifelong medication intake. Less than half of patients with chronic diseases globally are adherent to their prescribed medications which preclude the full benefit of treatment, worsens therapeutic outcomes, accelerates disease progression, and causes enormous economic losses. The accurate assessment of medication adherence is pivotal for both researchers and clinicians. Medication adherence can be assessed through both direct and indirect measures. Indirect measures include both subjective (self-report measures such as questionnaire and interview) and objective (pill count and secondary database analysis) measures and constitute the mainstay of assessing medication adherence. However, the lack of an inexpensive, ubiquitous, universal gold standard for assessment of medication adherence emphasizes the need to utilize a combination of measures to differentiate adherent and nonadherent patients. The global heterogeneity in health systems precludes the development of a universal guideline for evaluating medication adherence. Methods based on the secondary database analysis are mostly ineffectual in low-resource settings lacking electronic pharmacy and insurance databases and allowing refills without updated, valid prescriptions from private pharmacies. This significantly restricts the choices for assessing adherence until digitization of medical data takes root in much of the developing world. Nevertheless, there is ample scope for improving self-report measures of adherence. Effective interview techniques, especially accounting for suboptimal patient health literacy, validation of adherence questionnaires, and avoiding conceptual fallacies in reporting adherence can improve the assessment of medication adherence and promote understanding of its causal factors.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
改进用药依从性评估:以低资源环境为重点的挑战和考虑因素。
要提高慢性病患者的生存率和生活质量,就必须长期服药,而且往往是终身服药。全球只有不到一半的慢性病患者能够坚持按处方用药,从而无法充分享受治疗带来的益处,恶化治疗效果,加速疾病进展,并造成巨大的经济损失。准确评估用药依从性对研究人员和临床医生都至关重要。用药依从性可通过直接和间接测量方法进行评估。间接测量包括主观测量(自我报告测量,如问卷调查和访谈)和客观测量(药片计数和二级数据库分析),是评估用药依从性的主要方法。然而,由于缺乏一种廉价、普遍、通用的黄金标准来评估用药依从性,因此需要综合使用多种测量方法来区分依从性和非依从性患者。由于全球医疗系统存在差异,因此无法制定通用的用药依从性评估指南。在缺乏电子药房和保险数据库、允许私人药房在未更新有效处方的情况下重新配药的低资源环境中,基于二级数据库分析的方法大多无效。在医疗数据数字化在大部分发展中国家扎根之前,这极大地限制了评估服药依从性的选择。尽管如此,自我报告的依从性评估方法仍有很大的改进余地。有效的访谈技术,尤其是考虑到患者健康知识不足、依从性问卷的验证以及避免报告依从性时的概念谬误,可以改善对用药依从性的评估,并促进对其成因的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Dancing pharynx. Prevalence and correlates of antenatal depression among women registered at antenatal clinic in North India. Targeting of interleukin-10 receptor by a potential human interleukin-10 peptide efficiently blocks interleukin-10 pathway-dependent cell proliferation. Association of bone mineral density and trabecular bone score with cardiovascular disease. Is there a role for oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction in age-associated bladder disorders?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1