Search

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based points to consider for cost-effective use of biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) in the treatment of inflammatory rheumatic diseases, specifically rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis. METHODS: Following EULAR procedures, an international task force was formed, consisting of 13 experts in rheumatology, epidemiology and pharmacology from seven European countries. Twelve strategies for cost-effective use of b/tsDMARDs were identified through individual and group discussion. For each strategy, PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for relevant English-language systematic reviews and, for six strategies, additionally for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Thirty systematic reviews and 21 RCTs were included. Based on the evidence, a set of overarching principles and points to consider was formulated by the task force using a Delphi procedure. Level of evidence (1a-5) and grade (A-D) were determined for each point to consider. Individual voting on the level of agreement (LoA; between 0 (completely disagree) and 10 (completely agree)) was performed anonymously. RESULTS: The task force agreed on five overarching principles. For 10 of 12 strategies, the evidence was sufficient to formulate one or more points to consider, leading to 20 in total, regarding response prediction, drug formulary use, biosimilars, loading doses, low-dose initial therapy, concomitant conventional synthetic DMARD use, route of administration, medication adherence, disease activity-guided dose optimisation and non-medical drug switching. Ten points to consider (50%) were supported by level 1 or 2 evidence. The mean LoA (SD) varied between 7.9 (1.2) and 9.8 (0.4). CONCLUSION: These points to consider can be used in rheumatology practices and complement inflammatory rheumatic disease treatment guidelines to incorporate cost-effectiveness in b/tsDMARD treatment.

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVE: To investigate the pharmacokinetics of methotrexate polyglutamate (MTX-PG) accumulation in red blood cells (RBCs) and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after oral and subcutaneous MTX treatment. METHODS: In a clinical prospective cohort study (Methotrexate Monitoring study), newly diagnosed patients with RA were randomised for oral or subcutaneous MTX. At 1, 2, 3 and 6 months after therapy initiation, blood was collected and RBCs and PBMCs were isolated. MTX-PG(1-6) concentrations were determined by mass spectrometry methods using stable isotopes of MTX-PG(1-6) as internal standards. RESULTS: 43 patients (mean age: 58.5 years, 77% female) were included. PBMCs and RBCs revealed disparate pharmacokinetic profiles in both absolute MTX-PG accumulation levels and distribution profiles. Intracellular MTX-PG accumulation in PBMCs was significantly (p<0.001) 10-fold to 20-fold higher than RBCs at all time points, regardless of the administration route. MTX-PG distribution in PBMCs was composed of mostly MTX-PG(1) (PG(1)>PG(2)>PG(3)). Remarkably, the distribution profile in PBMCs remained constant over 6 months. RBCs accumulated mainly MTX-PG(1) and lower levels of MTX-PG(2-5) at t=1 month. After 3 months, MTX-PG(3) was the main PG-moiety in RBCs, a profile retained after 6 months of MTX therapy. Subcutaneous MTX administration results in higher RBC drug levels than after oral administration, especially shortly after treatment initiation. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study reporting disparate MTX-PG accumulation profiles in RBCs versus PBMCs in newly diagnosed patients with RA during 6 months oral or subcutaneous MTX administration. This analysis can contribute to improved MTX therapeutic drug monitoring for patients with RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR 7149.

Contains fulltext : 225339.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify and prioritize factors important to patients and caregivers with regard to medication adherence in gout, osteoporosis (OP), and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to describe the reasons for their decisions. METHODS: Patients with gout, OP, and RA and their caregivers, purposively sampled from 5 rheumatology clinics in Australia, identified and ranked factors that they considered important for medication adherence using nominal group technique and discussed their decisions. An importance score (IS; scale 0-1) was calculated, and qualitative data were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: From 14 focus groups, 82 participants (67 patients and 15 caregivers) identified 49 factors. The top 5 factors based on the ranking of all participants were trust in doctor (IS 0.46), medication effectiveness (IS 0.31), doctor's knowledge (IS 0.25), side effects (IS 0.23), and medication-taking routine (IS 0.13). The order of the ranking varied by participant groupings, with patients ranking "trust in doctor" the highest, while caregivers ranked "side effects" the highest. The 5 themes reflecting the reasons for factors influencing adherence were as follows: motivation and certainty in supportive individualized care; living well and restoring function; fear of toxicity and cumulative harm; seeking control and involvement; and unnecessarily difficult and inaccessible. CONCLUSION: Factors related to the doctor, medication properties, and patients' medication knowledge and routine were important for adherence. Strengthening doctor-patient trust and partnership, managing side effects, and empowering patients with knowledge and skills for taking medication could enhance medication adherence in patients with rheumatic conditions.

Contains fulltext : 225357.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), AIMS: Tablets may be subdivided for dose adaptations or to ease swallowing. The handling is common in older patients but can be difficult and inaccurate. Currently, it is not known which hand-eye functions determine the ability of older people to break tablets by hand and to do so with acceptable ease and accuracy. The aim of this study was to develop a test battery to assess the hand-eye functions relevant in predicting easy and accurate tablet subdivision in older people. METHODS: A mixed methods study was conducted including literature reviews and a pilot experiment. The reviews were conducted in Pubmed, Google Scholar, Dutch journals and professional standards. The first review tried to identify the hand-eye functions relevant to tablet subdivision and the second the associated measuring instruments, testing protocols and normative data. A test battery was empanelled. A pilot experiment was conducted in 30 adult volunteers to optimize and evaluate the test battery. RESULTS: Five domains were considered relevant: hand size, hand strength, flexibility/manual dexterity, vision and coordination. Hand size could best be measured by finger circumference, hand strength by pinch- and grip strength, flexibility by active range of joint motion, manual dexterity (and flexibility, coordination, cognition, vision) by pegboard function, vision by near visual acuity. Older people preferred the use of tablet splitters over hand breaking. CONCLUSION: Easy and accurate tablet subdivision is essential to the good use of medicines. We developed a test battery for older people, but probably of value to all age groups.

Contains fulltext : 220623.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a condition presenting with long-term slow progression of structural and/or functional damage to the kidneys. Early detection is key to preventing complications and improving outcomes. Point-of-care estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) screening technology allows for detection of abnormal kidney function in the community pharmacy setting. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a community pharmacist-directed point-of-care screening program and to identify the prevalence of CKD in high-risk patients. DESIGN: Quantitative observational. SETTING: Four community pharmacies in British Columbia over a 6-month period. PATIENTS: In all, 642 participants with at least one CKD risk factor were identified and screened. Mean age was 60 years and females accounted for 55% of the study population. MEASUREMENTS: Serum creatinine was measured from peripheral blood using the HeathTab® screening system (Piccolo® Renal Function Panel with the Piccolo® blood chemistry analyzer). eGFR was calculated according to the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) formula. METHODS: Patients provided a sample of peripheral blood via a self-administered finger-prick and analytical data to assess kidney function was reported including blood urea nitrogen (BUN), serum creatinine, and electrolytes by the HealthTab(®) screening system. Once results were available, the pharmacist conducted a comprehensive medication review with the patient and recommended certain follow-up actions if appropriate. RESULTS: CKD risk factor included diabetes (30%), hypertension (45%), cardiovascular disease (12%), family history of kidney disease (13%), age over 55 years (68%), and an Aboriginal, Asian, South Asian, or African ethnic background (82%). A total of 11.5% of patients had eGFR values lower than 60 mL/min (abnormal renal function) and 34% had an eGFR between 60 and 89 mL/min (minimally reduced renal function). Overall pharmacists' actio

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVE: Nonadherence to medications is common in rheumatic conditions and associated with increased morbidity. Heterogeneous outcome reporting by researchers compromises the synthesis of evidence of interventions targeting adherence. We aimed to assess the scope of outcomes in interventional studies of medication adherence. METHODS: We searched electronic databases to February 2019 for published randomized controlled trials and observational studies of interventions with the primary outcome of medication adherence including adults with any rheumatic condition, written in English. We extracted and analyzed all outcome domains and adherence measures with prespecified extraction and analysis protocols. RESULTS: Overall, 53 studies reported 71 outcome domains classified into adherence (1 domain), health outcomes (38 domains), and adherence-related factors (e.g., medication knowledge; 32 domains). We subdivided adherence into 3 phases: initiation (n = 13 studies, 25%), implementation (n = 32, 60%), persistence (n = 27, 51%), and phase unclear (n = 20, 38%). Thirty-seven different instruments reported adherence in 115 unique ways (this includes different adherence definitions and calculations, metric, and method of aggregation). Forty-one studies (77%) reported health outcomes. The most frequently reported were medication adverse events (n = 24, 45%), disease activity (n = 11, 21%), bone turnover markers/physical function/quality of life (each n = 10, 19%). Thirty-three studies (62%) reported adherence-related factors. The most frequently reported were medication beliefs (n = 8, 15%), illness perception/medication satisfaction/satisfaction with medication information (each n = 5, 9%), condition knowledge/medication knowledge/trust in doctor (each n = 3, 6%). CONCLUSION: The outcome domains and adherence measures in interventional studies targeting adherence are heterogeneous. Consensus on relevant outcomes will improve the comparison of different strategies to support

Item does not contain fulltext, Annually, in the Netherlands, at least 100 million euro is wasted on unused medication. This waste not only has considerable economic implications, but is also associated with an unnecessary burden on the environment and suboptimal care due to nonadherence to therapy. The reasons for medication wastage can be found throughout the entire pharmaceutical supply and use chain, which includes manufacturers, distributors/wholesalers, prescribers, pharmacists and patients, both in the community and hospital setting. A number of strategies are needed to minimize the waste of medication, one of which should be a preventative approach. Involvement of all stakeholders in the supply chain is a prerequisite for a successful outcome. It is important that prescribers are aware of the extent and consequences of wastage, and of the possible ways to reduce it.

Contains fulltext : 205073.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)

Item does not contain fulltext, AIMS: Because practice-based data on the usage of idarucizumab for urgent dabigatran reversal is unavailable, we evaluated the appropriateness of idarucizumab usage, its haemostatic effectiveness and clinical outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: An observational cohort study was performed including consecutive patients who were treated with idarucizumab between 2016 and 2018. Appropriate usage was assessed with predefined criteria. Post-reversal effectiveness was evaluated according to International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) recommendations. Patients were followed for 90 days for occurrence of thromboembolism, (re-)bleeding and death. Idarucizumab was used in 88 patients, of whom 53 (60%) presented with severe bleeding (20 gastrointestinal and 18 intracranial) and 35 (40%) requiring urgent surgical intervention. Use of idarucizumab was judged inappropriate in 25 patients (28%). Effective haemostasis was achieved in 32 of 48 (67%) bleeding patients in whom assessment was possible. Seven of 16 patients with major bleeding who did not achieve effective haemostasis (five intracranial) died, compared with two of 32 patients with effective haemostasis (relative risk 7.0, 95% confidence interval 1.6-30). Four patients (4.2%) developed thromboembolism [2 (2.1%) within 30 days] and four patients (4.2%) re-bleeding, all within 10 days. Seventeen patients (19%) died; 10 (11%) within 5 days. CONCLUSION: In this practice-based cohort, idarucizumab use was considered inappropriate in 28% of patients. Effective haemostasis was achieved in two-third of bleeding patients and was associated with lower mortality risk. Clinical outcomes were similar to those observed in the RE-VERSE AD trial, comprising re-bleeds and thromboembolism, and a high-mortality rate.

Item does not contain fulltext, INTRODUCTION: Patients with Parkinson disease (PD) use multiple drugs. This pill burden with consequent poor adherence may cause worsening of motor symptoms and drug-related problems. Therefore, a multifaceted pharmacist-led intervention program was designed to improve adherence, motor-functioning, and quality of life (QoL) in PD patients. METHODS: This prospective pilot study was performed in an outpatient PD clinic, where usual care was compared with stepwise introduction of 3 interventions: unit dose packaging (UDP), Parkinson KinetiGraph (PKG), and pharmacist-led medication review (MR).The study analyzed endpoints at 6 weeks (stage 1, usual care), 10 weeks (stage 2, UDP), 14 weeks (stage 3, UDP + PKG), and 26 weeks (UDP + PKG + MR) on motor symptoms, medication adherence, and QoL. RESULTS: Medication adherence improved significantly after the combined UDP, PKG, and MR intervention in nonadherent patients. On time significantly increased from 56% (+/-30) at stage 1, to 64% (+/-25) at stage 3, and to 68% (+/-27) at stage 4, which correlated with an increase of 1.4 and 2.2 hours in stage 3 and 4, respectively. Quality of life only improved significantly after MR (Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire with 8 domains, 21.0 +/- 3.5 in stage 3 vs 19.5 +/- 5.3 in stage 4, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our data did not support the added value of UDP alone or in combination with PKG. Only the combined intervention of UDP, PKG, and MR showed significant improvements in medication adherence, on time, and QoL. This supports the effectiveness of MR by a clinical pharmacist for PD patients in an outpatient setting. Therefore, this small scale study should be followed by larger-scale trials on this topic.

Contains fulltext : 190523.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Over the last 20 years, there have been marked improvements in the availability of effective medications for rheumatic conditions such as gout, osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), which have led to a reduction in disease flares and the risk of re-fracture in osteoporosis, and the slowing of disease progression in RA. However, medication adherence remains suboptimal, as treatment regimens can be complex and difficult to continue long term. Many trials have been conducted to improve adherence to medication. Core domains, which are the outcomes of most relevance to patients and clinicians, are a pivotal component of any trial. These core domains should be measured consistently, so that all relevant trials can be combined in systematic reviews and meta-analyses to reach conclusions that are more valid. Failure to do this severely limits the potential for trial-based evidence to inform decisions on how to support medication adherence. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) - Interventions for Medication Adherence study by the OMERACT-Adherence Group aims to develop a core domain set for interventions that aim to support medication adherence in rheumatology. METHODS/DESIGN: This OMERACT-Adherence study has five phases: (1) a systematic review to identify outcome domains that have been reported in interventions focused on supporting medication adherence in rheumatology; (2) semi-structured stakeholder interviews with patients and caregivers to determine their views on the core domains; (3) focus groups using the nominal group technique with patients and caregivers to identify and rank domains that are relevant to them, including the reasons for their choices; (4) an international three-round modified Delphi survey involving patients with diverse rheumatic conditions, caregivers, health professionals, researchers and other stakeholders to develop a preliminary core domain set; and (5) a stakeholder workshop with OMERACT members to review, vote on

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 169959.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), INTRODUCTION: Non-adherence to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) is suspected to relate to health care costs. In this study we investigated this relation in the first year of treatment. METHODS: In a multi-center cohort study with a one year follow up, non-adherence was continuously measured using electronic monitored medication jars. Non-adherence was defined as the number of days with a negative difference between expected and observed opening of the container. Cost measurement focused on hospital costs in the first year: consultations, emergency room visits, hospitalization, medical procedures, imaging modalities, medication costs, and laboratory tests. Cost volumes were registered from patient medical files. We applied multivariate regression analyses for the association between non-adherence and costs, and other variables (age, sex, center, baseline disease activity, diagnosis, socioeconomic status, anxiety and depression) and costs. RESULTS: Of the 275 invited patients, 206 were willing to participate. 74.2% had rheumatoid arthritis, 20.9% had psoriatic arthritis and 4.9% undifferentiated arthritis. 23.7% of the patients were more than 20% non-adherent over the follow-up period. Mean costs are euro 2117.25 (SD euro 3020.32). Non-adherence was positively related to costs in addition to baseline anxiety. CONCLUSION: Non-adherence is associated with health care costs in the first year of treatment for arthritis. This suggests that improving adherence is not only associated with better outcome, but also with savings.

Contains fulltext : 172326.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: A disease activity-guided dose optimisation strategy of adalimumab or etanercept (TNFi (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors)) has shown to be non-inferior in maintaining disease control in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) compared with usual care. However, the cost-effectiveness of this strategy is still unknown. METHOD: This is a preplanned cost-effectiveness analysis of the Dose REduction Strategy of Subcutaneous TNF inhibitors (DRESS) study, a randomised controlled, open-label, non-inferiority trial performed in two Dutch rheumatology outpatient clinics. Patients with low disease activity using TNF inhibitors were included. Total healthcare costs were measured and quality adjusted life years (QALY) were based on EQ5D utility scores. Decremental cost-effectiveness analyses were performed using bootstrap analyses; incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) was used to express cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: 180 patients were included, and 121 were allocated to the dose optimisation strategy and 59 to control. The dose optimisation strategy resulted in a mean cost saving of -euro12 280 (95 percentile -euro10 502; -euro14 104) per patient per 18 months. There is an 84% chance that the dose optimisation strategy results in a QALY loss with a mean QALY loss of -0.02 (-0.07 to 0.02). The decremental cost-effectiveness ratio (DCER) was euro390 493 (euro5 085 184; dominant) of savings per QALY lost. The mean iNMB was euro10 467 (euro6553-euro14 037). Sensitivity analyses using 30% and 50% lower prices for TNFi remained cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Disease activity-guided dose optimisation of TNFi results in considerable cost savings while no relevant loss of quality of life was observed. When the minimal QALY loss is compensated with the upper limit of what society is willing to pay or accept in the Netherlands, the net savings are still high. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR3216; Post-results.

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVE: To monitor whether biologic DMARD (bDMARD) home storage temperatures comply with the manufacturers' Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) recommendations. METHODS: This observational study included consenting adult patients from eight Dutch pharmacies who received their bDMARDs with a validated temperature logger. Patients were instructed to store their packages according to standard label instructions and to return the temperature logger(s) after use. Primary outcome was defined as the proportion of patients that stored their bDMARDs within the SmPC recommended temperature range. In addition, the proportion of patients storing bDMARDs below 0 degrees C or above 25 degrees C for longer than two consecutive hours was estimated. RESULTS: A total of 255 (87.0%) patients (mean age 53.2 (s.d.; 13.1) years, 51.4% female) returned their temperature logger(s) to the pharmacy. Of these, 17 patients (6.7%) stored their bDMARD within the recommended temperature range. The proportion of the patients that stored their bDMARD for more than 2 h consecutive time below 0 degrees C or above 25 degrees C was respectively 24.3% (median duration: 3.7 h (IQR 2.2 h; range 2.0-1,097.1 h) and 2.0% (median duration: 11.8 h (IQR 44.3 h; range 2.0-381.9 h). CONCLUSION: The majority of patients do not store their bDMARDs within the SmPC-recommended temperature range.

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare three measurement methods for non-adherence to DMARDs in early arthritis patients: the Compliance Questionnaire Rheumatology (CQR), the intracellular uptake of MTX in the form of MTX-polyglutamates (MTX-PGs) and electronic measurement with Medication Event Monitoring Systems (MEMS). METHODS: DMARD naive early arthritis patients were included in an ongoing cohort study. MEMS were used to measure adherence continuously, while every 3 months MTX-PGs were collected together with the CQR. The associations between the measures were estimated with Spearman rank correlations. Sensitivity and specificity of the CQR against a MEMS cut-off was compared at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The same applied to MTX-PGs against a MEMS cut-off and MTX-PGs against a CQR cut-off. For the association between MEMS, the CQR and MTX-PGs, a multilevel linear regression model was performed with age, gender, weeks of treatment and MTX dosage as covariates. RESULTS: We included 206 patients. Non-adherence measured with MEMS varied over time and between DMARDs. The CQR score was not associated with MEMS non-adherence at 3, 9 and 12 months. At 9 months, MTX-PGs was associated with MEMS non-adherence, as well as with the CQR. All correlations were below 0.30. CONCLUSION: Associations between the three measures are weak. Explanations are individual differences in the uptake of MTX, and little variance in adherence between patients. Moreover, the measurement domains differ: perceptions (CQR), behaviour (MEMS) and pharmacokinetics (MTX).

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: There has been much debate recently on the best type of thromboprophylaxis following elective total joint replacement surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare rates of venous thromboembolism (VTE), gastro-intestinal (GI) bleeding and mortality events, with use of new oral anticoagulants (NOAC) or low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) compared with aspirin in patients undergoing total joint replacement. METHODS: A population-based retrospective cohort study was performed using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Patients >/=18 years of age who had undergone total knee (n = 3261) or hip replacement (THR (n = 4016)) between 2008 and 2012 were included. Within this population, three cohorts were selected, based on their first prescription within the 35-day period after surgery: use of NOACs only, LMWHs only and aspirin only. Incidence rates were calculated, and Cox proportional hazard models were fitted to estimate the risk of VTE, GI bleeding and all-cause mortality with the use of NOACs and LMWHs compared with aspirin use after total knee replacement and THR. We statistically adjusted our analyses for lifestyle factors, comorbidities and concomitant drug use. RESULTS: Total knee replacement and THR patients currently on LMWHs had higher risk of VTE (HR = 17.2 (6.9-43.0) and HR = 39.5 (18.0-87.0), respectively), GI bleeding (HR = 20.9 (1.9-232.3) and HR = 2.0 (0.2-17.2), respectively) and all-cause mortality (HR = 4.3 (1.7-12.4) and HR = 4.0 (2.4-6.7), respectively). NOAC use was associated with an increased risk of GI bleeding in patients undergoing THR surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to previous studies, we found an increased risk of VTE, GI bleeding and all-cause mortality with the use of LMWHs compared with aspirin. Risk of GI bleeding was increased with the use of NOACs compared with aspirin use after THR surgery. Copyright (c) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Contains fulltext : 171491.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), It is generally thought that people with diabetes mellitus (DM) are more likely to suffer from osteoarthritis (OA) due to an increased body mass index (BMI), resulting in mechanical destruction of cartilage. However, previous studies have suggested a coexisting metabolic causality.To evaluate the risk of hip or knee replacement, as a proxy for severe OA, in patients with DM. We additionally evaluated the risk of total joint replacement (TJR) with various proxies for increased DM severity.A population-based case-control study was performed, using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Cases (n = 94,609) were defined as patients >18 years who had undergone TJR between 2000 and 2012. Controls were matched by age, gender, and general practice. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the risk of total knee (TKR) and total hip replacement (THR) surgery associated with use of antidiabetic drugs (ADs). We additionally stratified current AD users by proxies for DM severity.Current AD use was significantly associated with a lower risk of TKR (OR = 0.86 (95% CI = 0.78-0.94)) and THR (OR = 0.90 (95% CI = 0.82-0.99)) compared to patients not using ADs. Moreover, risk of TKR and THR was decreased with increasing HbA1c.This study does not support the theory that DM patients are more likely to suffer from severe OA as compared to patients without diabetes. Moreover, risk of severe OA necessitating TJR decreases with increasing DM severity. This is possibly due to dissimilarities in methodology, a decrease in eligibility for surgery, or variability of OA phenotypes.

Contains fulltext : 172012.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Although disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are the cornerstone of treatment for inflammatory rheumatic diseases, medication adherence to DMARDs is often suboptimal. Effective interventions to improve adherence to DMARDs are lacking, and new targets are needed to improve adherence. The aim of the present study was to explore patients' barriers and facilitators of optimal DMARD use. These factors might be used as targets for adherence interventions. METHODS: In a mixed method study design, patients (n = 120) with inflammatory arthritis (IA) completed a questionnaire based on an existing adapted Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify facilitators and barriers of DMARD use. A subgroup of these patients (n = 21) participated in focus groups to provide insights into their facilitators and barriers. The answers to the questionnaires and responses of the focus groups were thematically coded by three researchers independently and subsequently categorized. RESULTS: The barriers and facilitators that were reported by IA patients presented large inter-individual variations. The identified barriers and facilitators could be captured in the following domains based on an adapted TDF: (i) knowledge, (ii) emotions, (iii) attention, memory, and decision processes, (iv) social influences, (v) beliefs about capability, (vi) beliefs about consequences, (vii) motivation and goals, (viii) goal conflict, (ix) environmental context and resources, and (x) skills. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IA have a variety of barriers and facilitators with regard to their DMARD use. All of these barriers and facilitators could be categorized into adapted domains of the TDF. Interventions that address individual facilitators and barriers, based on capability, opportunity, and motivation, are needed to develop strategies for medication adherence that are tailored to individual patient needs.

Item does not contain fulltext, AIMS: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common musculoskeletal condition in the elderly population. However, no disease modifying drug exists for this disease. In vivo animal studies have suggested that thiazolidinediones (TZD) may be used as disease modifying osteoarthritis drugs (DMOADs). To our knowledge, this has not yet been examined in humans before. The aim was to determine the risk of total joint replacement (TJR) in patients using TZDs compared with diabetic patients using other antidiabetic drugs. METHODS: A population based case-control study was performed using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Cases (n = 94 609) were defined as patients >18 years of age who had undergone total knee (TKR) or hip replacement (THR) between 2000 and 2012. Controls were matched by age, gender and practice/surgery. Conditional logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the risk of TKR and THR with the use of TZDs in patients currently using one or more antidiabetic drugs. In order to determine effect with prolonged use, we also stratified TZD users by total number of prescriptions prior to surgery. We statistically adjusted our analyses for lifestyle factory, comorbidities and concomitant drug use. RESULTS: There was no difference in risk of TKR (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.93, 1.27) and THR (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76, 1.10) when TZD users were compared with other AD users. Furthermore, we did not find an association with prolonged use of TZDs and TJR. CONCLUSION: Despite promising results from animal in vivo studies, this study did not find any evidence for a disease modifying osteoarthritic effect of TZDs.

Contains fulltext : 170937.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), Introduction: Despite much research, interventions to improve medication adherence report disappointing and inconsistent results. Tailored approaches that match interventions and patient determinants of non-adherence were seldom used in clinical trials. The presence of a multitude of theoretical frameworks and models to categorize interventions and patient determinants complicated the development of common categories shared by interventions and determinants. We retrieved potential interventions and patient determinants from published literature on medication adherence, matched them like locks and keys, and categorized them according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Methods: We identified the most relevant literature reviews on interventions and determinants in a pragmatic literature search, extracted all interventions and determinants, grouped similar concepts to umbrella terms and assigned them to TDF categories. All steps were finalized in consensus discussion between the authors. Results: Sixteen articles (5 with determinants, 11 with interventions) were included for analysis. We extracted 103 interventions and 42 determinants that we divided in 26 modifiable and 16 unmodifiable determinants. All interventions and modifiable determinants were matched within 11 categories (Knowledge; Skills; Social/professional role and identity; Beliefs about capabilities; Beliefs about consequences; Intentions; Memory, Attention and decision processes; Environmental context and resources; Social influences; Emotion; and Behavioral regulation). Conclusion: In published trials on medication adherence, the congruence between interventions and determinants can be assessed with matching interventions to determinants. To be successful, interventions in medication adherence should target current modifiable determinants and be tailored to the unmodifiable determinants. Modifiable and unmodifiable determinants need to be assessed at inclusion of intervention studies to identif

Contains fulltext : 170850.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Background Little is known about healthcare providers' (HCPs) perceptions of adherence management of oral anticancer agents (OACA). The study aims to explore HCPs perceptions of OACA and adherence. Methods A cross-sectional, multi-center observational study among HCPs in hemato-oncology settings in Belgium and the Netherlands was conducted. Physicians, nurse practitioners, nurses and pharmacists were asked to complete questionnaires on their perception of patient adherence and its management (PAMQ) and their beliefs about OACA (BMQ-Specific). Physicians were also asked to complete a questionnaire on their perception of shared decision making (SDM-Q-Doc). Results The sample consisted of 254 HCPs. Variations were found between HCPs on the PAMQ: 56%, 50%, 28% and 23% of, respectively, physicians, nurse practitioners, nurses and pharmacists reported to know the level of adherence of their patients and 59%, 53%, 43% and 10% of, respectively, physicians, nurse practitioners, nurses and pharmacists think that patients discuss adherence with them. 70%, 82%, 63% and 62% of, respectively, physicians, nurse practitioners, nurses and pharmacists reported to have knowledge of causes of non-adherence, while 78%, 87%, 76% and 80% of them reported to have knowledge of consequences of non-adherence. 81%, 92%, 83% and 67% of, respectively, physicians, nurse practitioners, nurses and pharmacists felt able to influence adherence. Lower concerns beliefs were associated with a higher total score on the PAMQ [beta (SE)=-0.85 (0.24); CI -1.33--0.38]. Physicians scored a mean of 75 on the SDM-scale. Conclusions A considerable part of the HCPs states they do not know the adherence of their patients, nor do they think patients discuss adherence with them. However, they feel to have knowledge of adherence and perceive to be able to influence adherence of their patients.

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVES: To compare pharmacists' and pharmacy technicians' perceptions of patients' beliefs regarding inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with those of patients and to compare the ICS beliefs of pharmacists and technicians with those of patients with asthma. METHODS: 1269 community pharmacies were approached to fill out an online questionnaire; 1952 patients were sent a questionnaire by post. Beliefs (i.e., necessity and concerns) regarding ICS were measured using (an adapted version of) the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ-specific). Pharmacists and technicians were instructed to fill out the BMQ for themselves, and to fill it out in the way they thought most of their patients would complete it. RESULTS: 136 pharmacists, 90 pharmacy technicians and 161 patients with asthma completed the questionnaire. Pharmacists and technicians thought patients had more concerns about ICS than patients themselves reported (p < 0.0001). They also thought that patients had stronger beliefs in their personal need for ICS than patients reported (p < 0.01). Pharmacists reported lower levels of concerns than patients (p < 0.05) and both providers attributed a higher level of necessity to ICS than patients did (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Pharmacists and technicians overestimate the personal need for treatment as well as the concerns patients with asthma have regarding ICS. They also have, to some extent, stronger positive beliefs about ICS than patients. If pharmacists and technicians expect that patients share their positive views about ICS, they might be less likely to elicit and address patients' doubts and concerns about ICS, which might be relevant for effective ICS treatment and subsequent patient outcomes.

Contains fulltext : 152071.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext, Adherence to medication in patients with rheumatoid arthritis is low, varying from 30 to 80%. Improving adherence to therapy could therefore dramatically improve the efficacy of drug therapy. Although indicators for suboptimal adherence can be useful to identify nonadherent patients, and could function as targets for adherence-improving interventions, no indicators are yet found to be consistently and strongly related to nonadherence. Despite this, nonadherence behavior could conceptually be categorized into two subtypes: unintentional (due to forgetfulness, regimen complexity or physical problems) and intentional (based on the patient's decision to take no/less medication). In case of intentional nonadherence, patients seem to make a benefit-risk analysis weighing the perceived risks of the treatment against the perceived benefits. This weighing process may be influenced by the patient's beliefs about medication, the patient's self-efficacy and the patient's knowledge of the disease. This implicates that besides tackling practical barriers, clinicians should be sensitive to patient's personal beliefs that may impact medication adherence.