Back to Search
Start Over
Ethical acceptability of offering financial incentives for taking antipsychotic depot medication: patients' and clinicians' perspectives after a 12-month randomized controlled trial
- Source :
- BMC Psychiatry, 17:313. BioMed Central Ltd., BMC Psychiatry, Vol 17, Iss 1, Pp 1-8 (2017), BMC Psychiatry
- Publication Year :
- 2017
- Publisher :
- BioMed Central Ltd., 2017.
-
Abstract
- Background A randomized controlled trial ‘Money for Medication’(M4M) was conducted in which patients were offered financial incentives for taking antipsychotic depot medication. This study assessed the attitudes and ethical considerations of patients and clinicians who participated in this trial. Methods Three mental healthcare institutions in secondary psychiatric care in the Netherlands participated in this study. Patients (n = 169), 18–65 years, diagnosed with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or another psychotic disorder who had been prescribed antipsychotic depot medication, were randomly assigned to receive 12 months of either treatment as usual plus a financial reward for each depot of medication received (intervention group) or treatment as usual alone (control group). Structured questionnaires were administered after the 12-month intervention period. Data were available for 133 patients (69 control and 64 intervention) and for 97 clinicians. Results Patients (88%) and clinicians (81%) indicated that financial incentives were a good approach to improve medication adherence. Ethical concerns were categorized according to the four-principles approach (autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice). Patients and clinicians alike mentioned various advantages of M4M in clinical practice, such as increased medication adherence and improved illness insight; but also disadvantages such as reduced intrinsic motivation, loss of autonomy and feelings of dependence. Conclusions Overall, patients evaluated financial incentives as an effective method of improving medication adherence and were willing to accept this reward during clinical treatment. Clinicians were also positive about the use of this intervention in daily practice. Ethical concerns are discussed in terms of patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. We conclude that this intervention is ethically acceptable under certain conditions, and that further research is necessary to clarify issues of benefit, motivation and the preferred size and duration of the incentive. Trial registration Nederlands Trial Register, number NTR2350. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12888-017-1485-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
- Subjects :
- Adult
Male
medicine.medical_specialty
Attitude of Health Personnel
lcsh:RC435-571
medicine.medical_treatment
Schizoaffective disorder
law.invention
03 medical and health sciences
0302 clinical medicine
Reward
Randomized controlled trial
law
Surveys and Questionnaires
Intervention (counseling)
lcsh:Psychiatry
Humans
Medicine
030212 general & internal medicine
Justice (ethics)
Psychiatry
Antipsychotic
Netherlands
Ethics
Motivation
business.industry
Beneficence
Patient Acceptance of Health Care
medicine.disease
030227 psychiatry
Psychiatry and Mental health
Treatment Outcome
Incentive
Schizophrenia
Delayed-Action Preparations
Antipsychotic depot medication
Female
Financial incentives
business
Research Article
Antipsychotic Agents
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 1471244X
- Volume :
- 17
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- BMC Psychiatry
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....2fcb6b8d8a51366784d0141c320b3107