Search

Background Non-adherence to antihypertensive agents is common, mainly because of the low perceived burden of high blood pressure. General practitioners (GPs) are unable to predict whether patients are adhering to a recommended treatment. Knowledge about adherence might be of clinical interest in patients non-responding to antihypertensive treatment.Aim To assess the usefulness of an Adherence Monitoring Package (AMoPac) to identify non-adherence in patients non-responding to antihypertensive treatment.Methods AMoPac consists of (1) 4 weeks of electronic adherence monitoring, (2) pharmacist’s feedback on patient’s intake behaviour and (3) adherence metrics including clinical-pharmaceutical recommendations to the GP. AMoPac-HYP (‘Adherence Monitoring Package to identify non-adherence in ambulatory HYPertensive patients’) is an observational study among GPs and ambulatory patients with hypertension in a real-world setting. The primary outcome was GPs’ perceived usefulness of AMoPac. Secondary outcomes were (1) frequency of medication problems and prescribing errors; (2) types of pharmacist’s’ recommendations; (3) acceptance of the recommendations by GPs; (4) medication adherence and (5) patients’ satisfaction. Outcomes are reported descriptively. Data were collected with questionnaires and electronic monitoring of medicine intake.Results Fifteen GPs and 15 patients with hypertension participated in the AMoPac-HYP Study. Patients were on average 62 years old, and mean blood pressure was 137/83 mmHg. All GPs rated AMoPac as useful. The most frequently mentioned use was excluding non-adherence in patients with hypertension (93%). Medication problems and prescribing errors were observed in 80% of the patients. The study pharmacist recommended adherence support (N=9 patients) and treatment optimisation (N=8 patients). The recommendations were accepted and implemented in 10 of 17 cases by the GP. Patients’ mean taking and timing adherence were 90% and 86%, respectively. Satisfaction with the study procedures among patients was high.Conclusion AMoPac was rated as useful for identifying and excluding non-adherence in patients with hypertension and was highly accepted among patients. Including adherence data in clinical decision-making could contribute to optimising patient care.

Background Adherence to pharmacotherapy is crucial to prevent symptom deterioration in chronic diseases. However, non-adherence to chronic treatments is prevalent, especially in polypharmacy. Practical tools to assess adherence to polypharmacy in primary care are missing.Aims We aimed to develop an Adherence Monitoring Package (AMoPac) for general practitioners (GPs) to identify patient non-adherence. We tested the feasibility and acceptance of AMoPac in the primary healthcare setting.Methods AMoPac was developed based on peer-reviewed literature. It consists in (1) electronic monitoring of patients’ medication intakes for 4 weeks, (2) receiving feedback on intake behaviour by the pharmacist and (3) generating an adherence report to communicate to the GPs. A feasibility study was conducted with heart failure patients. GPs’ acceptance of AMoPac was explored with semistructured interviews. Electronic transmission of the reports into the GP’s electronic health record along with laboratory reports stating N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels was analysed.Results We developed AMoPac and tested its feasibility with six GPs and seven heart failure patients. GPs were satisfied with the adherence report including the pharmaceutical-clinical recommendations. Integrated transmission of adherence reports to GPs was not feasible due to technical incompatibilities. Mean taking adherence was 86.4%±12.8% and three patients had low correct dosing-days (69%, 38% and 36%, respectively). NT-proBNP ranged from 102 to 8561 pg/mL and four patients had elevated values (>1000 pg/mL).Conclusion AMoPac is feasible in the primary healthcare setting, excluding the integrated transmission of adherence reports to GPs. The procedure was highly accepted by GPs and patients. AMoPac fills a gap by combining clinical values with adherence data, and therefore, delivers a multifaceted picture of the patient’s behaviour. In case of unmet adherence, our tool might facilitate the selection of patient-centred approaches to optimise pharmacological therapies in chronic heart failure patients.Trial registration number NCT04326101.

Objectives Particularly at transitions of care points information concerning current medication tends to be incomplete. A medication chart that contains all essential information on current therapy is likely to be a helpful tool for patients and healthcare providers. We aimed to investigate any type of benefits associated with medication charts provided at transition points.Methods A systematic review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was performed. Two databases, two online journals and two association websites dedicated to biomedicine and pharmacy issues were consulted to identify studies for the review using the search term ‘medication chart’ and synonyms. We run our search from database inception up to March 2019. Studies of any study design, intervention and population which examined the effect of paper-based medication charts were included. We extracted study results narratively and coded and classified them by themes and categories inductively by using the ‘framework method’ with content analysis. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) tool.Results From the 846 retrieved articles, 30 studies met the inclusion criteria, mostly from Germany (18 studies) and the USA (5 studies). Thirteen studies reported a statistically significant result. In the ‘patient theme’, the most obvious benefits were an increase in medication knowledge, a reduction of medication errors and higher medication adherence. In the ‘interdisciplinary theme’, a medication chart represented a helpful tool to increase communication and inter-sectoral cooperation between healthcare providers. In the ‘theme of terms and conditions’, accuracy and currency of data are prerequisites for any positive effect. The quality of the studies was classified predominantly weak mainly due to unmet good quality criteria (no randomised controlled trials study design, no reported dropouts).Conclusion Overall, the reviewed studies suggested some benefits when using medication charts. Healthcare providers could consider using medication charts in their counselling practice. However, it is unknown whether the reported benefits lead to measurable improvement in clinical outcomes.PROSPERO registration number

Objectives To translate the SWAMECO from German into English; to complete content and face validity with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and with patients from the target population that is, community-dwelling adult patients taking three or more medicines for three or more months.Design The process followed guidance from Sousa et al and included translation and cross-cultural adaptation, and cognitive testing among selected HCPs and patients. As the SWAMECO questionnaire is a screening instrument, pilot testing was performed in the target population.Setting Three community pharmacies in and around Cork (Ireland) recruited patients for interviews and pilot testing.Participants Community-dwelling patients with ≥3 oral medications for ≥3 months, aged ≥18 years.Outcome measures Answers to the SWAMECO questionnaire; clarity of each question, each instruction and each response format.Results Issues related to cultural and conceptual differences were resolved by rewording some items. Ten HCPs and 11 patients completed the questionnaire and gave their feedback and opinions on criteria according to Fitzpatrick et al. Revisions included rewording; deleting of two questions; using of colour to signpost that is, where to skip questions that were not applicable to the participants; and replacement of the A-14 medication adherence scale with three validated items. Of the 66 patients enrolled for pilot testing, eight (12.1%) indicated swallowing difficulties. Difficulties with ingesting foods or liquids correlated with swallowing difficulties (p=0.001). All patients perceived discomfort (mean 6.9 on a Visual Analogue Scale from 0 to 10). Patients with swallowing difficulties were significantly more likely to report modifying their medicines (p=0.004) and having poorer medication adherence (p=0.028) than those who had no swallowing difficulties.Conclusions The version of the SWAMECO questionnaire in English contains 28 items and is ready for use in adults with polypharmacy.