Adherence to oral pharmacological treatment in cancer patients: Systematic review.

IF 3.1 Q2 ONCOLOGY Oncology Reviews Pub Date : 2019-04-16 eCollection Date: 2019-01-14 DOI:10.4081/oncol.2019.402
Melissa Perdomo Claros, Claudia Viviana Marín Messa, Herney Andrés García-Perdomo
{"title":"Adherence to oral pharmacological treatment in cancer patients: Systematic review.","authors":"Melissa Perdomo Claros,&nbsp;Claudia Viviana Marín Messa,&nbsp;Herney Andrés García-Perdomo","doi":"10.4081/oncol.2019.402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective was to identify the best-validated scale for assessing oral pharmacological adherence in oncology patients. A bibliographic search was performed in MEDLINE via Ovid, EMBASE, CENTRAL and LILACS. We included all studies in which a validation of adherence scales to oral pharmacological treatment was performed in oncology patients older than 18 years without gender distinction. We excluded studies that included newly diagnosed patients. No statistical analysis was performed due to the nature of the study. A total of 4609 studies were found. After screening, six studies were selected for qualitative analysis. In the analysis of the six included studies, a total of 855 patients older than 18 years with oncological diagnoses were found. Two of the studies, Bagcivan <i>et al</i>. and Amorim <i>et al</i>., used scales that show acceptable validity and reliability to adequately measure adherence to pharmacological treatment in each of the patients. In this way, the quality of patient care and success in pharmacological treatments can be guaranteed. According to the results obtained in the evaluation of biases and analysis of psychometric properties, the best-validated scales are as follows: Adherence Determinants Questionnaire (ADQ) (Brazilian version) and the Oral Chemotherapy Adherence Scale (OCAS). These are valid, reliable and useful scales that can be adapted to any cultural context.</p>","PeriodicalId":19487,"journal":{"name":"Oncology Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"402"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4081/oncol.2019.402","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oncology Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4081/oncol.2019.402","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

The objective was to identify the best-validated scale for assessing oral pharmacological adherence in oncology patients. A bibliographic search was performed in MEDLINE via Ovid, EMBASE, CENTRAL and LILACS. We included all studies in which a validation of adherence scales to oral pharmacological treatment was performed in oncology patients older than 18 years without gender distinction. We excluded studies that included newly diagnosed patients. No statistical analysis was performed due to the nature of the study. A total of 4609 studies were found. After screening, six studies were selected for qualitative analysis. In the analysis of the six included studies, a total of 855 patients older than 18 years with oncological diagnoses were found. Two of the studies, Bagcivan et al. and Amorim et al., used scales that show acceptable validity and reliability to adequately measure adherence to pharmacological treatment in each of the patients. In this way, the quality of patient care and success in pharmacological treatments can be guaranteed. According to the results obtained in the evaluation of biases and analysis of psychometric properties, the best-validated scales are as follows: Adherence Determinants Questionnaire (ADQ) (Brazilian version) and the Oral Chemotherapy Adherence Scale (OCAS). These are valid, reliable and useful scales that can be adapted to any cultural context.

Abstract Image

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
癌症患者口服药物治疗的依从性:系统评价。
目的是确定评估肿瘤患者口服药物依从性的最佳有效量表。在MEDLINE中通过Ovid、EMBASE、CENTRAL和LILACS进行文献检索。我们纳入了所有对年龄大于18岁的肿瘤患者进行口服药物治疗依从性量表验证的研究,没有性别区分。我们排除了包括新诊断患者的研究。由于研究的性质,未进行统计分析。总共发现了4609项研究。经筛选,选取6项研究进行定性分析。在对六项纳入的研究的分析中,共发现了855名年龄大于18岁的肿瘤诊断患者。Bagcivan et al.和Amorim et al.两项研究使用了具有可接受效度和可靠性的量表来充分衡量每位患者对药物治疗的依从性。这样,就可以保证病人护理的质量和药物治疗的成功。根据偏倚评估和心理测量特性分析的结果,最有效的量表为依从性决定因素问卷(ADQ)(巴西版)和口服化疗依从性量表(OCAS)。这些都是有效、可靠和有用的量表,可以适应任何文化背景。
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
Oncology Reviews
Oncology Reviews ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: Oncology Reviews is a quarterly peer-reviewed, international journal that publishes authoritative state-of-the-art reviews on preclinical and clinical aspects of oncology. The journal will provide up-to-date information on the latest achievements in different fields of oncology for both practising clinicians and basic researchers. Oncology Reviews aims at being international in scope and readership, as reflected also by its Editorial Board, gathering the world leading experts in both pre-clinical research and everyday clinical practice. The journal is open for publication of supplements, monothematic issues and for publishing abstracts of scientific meetings; conditions can be obtained from the Editor-in-Chief or the publisher.
期刊最新文献
Interventions to improve access to cancer care in underserved populations in high income countries: a systematic review. The prevalence of non-sentinel lymph node metastasis among breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node involvement and its impact on clinical decision-making: a single-centred retrospective study. Tumor therapeutics in the era of "RECIST": past, current insights, and future prospects. Colorectal cancer and associated genetic, lifestyle, cigarette, nargileh-hookah use and alcohol consumption risk factors: a comprehensive case-control study. Environment and gynaecologic cancers.
×
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