Patient adherence to medication requirements for therapy of type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes is a complex, progressive endocrine and metabolical disease that typically requires substantial lifestyle changes and multiple medications to lower blood glucose, reduce cardiovascular risk and address comorbidities. Despite an extensive range of available and effective treatments, <50% of patients achieve a glycaemical target of HbA <7.0% and about two-thirds die of premature cardiovascular disease. Adherence to prescribed therapies is an important factor in the management of type 2 diabetes that is often overlooked. Inadequate adherence to oral antidiabetes agents, defined as collecting <80% of prescribed medication, is variously estimated to apply to between 36% and 93% of patients. All studies affirm that a significant proportion of type 2 diabetes patients exhibit poor adherence that will contribute to less than desired control. Identified factors that impede adherence include complex dosing regimens, clinical inertia, safety concerns, socioeconomic issues, ethnicity, patient education and beliefs, social support and polypharmacy. This review explores these factors and potential strategies to improve adherence in patients with type 2 diabetes. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Physicians' perceptions, attitudes and expectations regarding the role of hospital-based pharmacists in the West Bank, Palestine

Objective - To evaluate the perceptions, expectations and experiences of physicians with regard to hospital-based pharmacists in the West Bank, Palestine. Methods - A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 250 physicians practising in four general hospitals in the West Bank, Palestine. The main sections of the questionnaire comprised a series of statements pertaining to physicians' perceptions, expectations and experiences with pharmacists. Key findings - One hundred and fifty seven questionnaires were completed and returned (response rate, 62.8%). The majority of respondents were most comfortable with pharmacists detecting and preventing prescription errors (76.4%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 69.5–81.2%) and patient education (57.9%; CI 51.2–63.4%) but they were not comfortable with pharmacists suggesting the use of prescription medications to patients (56.7%; CI 49.8–62.4%). Most physicians (62.4%; CI 56.8–69.1%) expected the pharmacist to educate their patients about the safe and appropriate use of their medication. However, approximately one-third (31.7%; CI 26.0–39.6%) did not expect pharmacists to be available for consultation during rounds. Physicians' experiences with pharmacists were less favourable; whereas 77% (CI 70.2–81.5%) of the physicians agreed that pharmacists were always a reliable source of information, only 11.5% (CI 6.2–16.4%) agreed that pharmacists appeared to be willing to take responsibility for solving any drug-related problems. Conclusion -The present study showed that hospital physicians are more likely to accept traditional pharmacy services than newer clinical services for hospital-based pharmacists in the West Bank, Palestine. Pharmacists should therefore interact more positively and more frequently with physicians. This will close the gap between the physicians' commonly held perceptions of what they expect pharmacists to do and what pharmacists can actually do, and gain support for an extended role of hospital-based pharmacists in future patient therapy management.

Multiple component patient safety intervention in English hospitals:controlled evaluation of second phase

Objective: To independently evaluate the impact of the second phase of the Health Foundation's Safer Patients Initiative (SPI2) on a range of patient safety measures. Design: A controlled before and after design. Five substudies: survey of staff attitudes; review of case notes from high risk (respiratory) patients in medical wards; review of case notes from surgical patients; indirect evaluation of hand hygiene by measuring hospital use of handwashing materials; measurement of outcomes (adverse events, mortality among high risk patients admitted to medical wards, patients' satisfaction, mortality in intensive care, rates of hospital acquired infection). Setting: NHS hospitals in England. Participants: Nine hospitals participating in SPI2 and nine matched control hospitals. Intervention The SPI2 intervention was similar to the SPI1, with somewhat modified goals, a slightly longer intervention period, and a smaller budget per hospital. Results: One of the scores (organisational climate) showed a significant (P=0.009) difference in rate of change over time, which favoured the control hospitals, though the difference was only 0.07 points on a five point scale. Results of the explicit case note reviews of high risk medical patients showed that certain practices improved over time in both control and SPI2 hospitals (and none deteriorated), but there were no significant differences between control and SPI2 hospitals. Monitoring of vital signs improved across control and SPI2 sites. This temporal effect was significant for monitoring the respiratory rate at both the six hour (adjusted odds ratio 2.1, 99% confidence interval 1.0 to 4.3; P=0.010) and 12 hour (2.4, 1.1 to 5.0; P=0.002) periods after admission. There was no significant effect of SPI for any of the measures of vital signs. Use of a recommended system for scoring the severity of pneumonia improved from 1.9% (1/52) to 21.4% (12/56) of control and from 2.0% (1/50) to 41.7% (25/60) of SPI2 patients. This temporal change was significant (7.3, 1.4 to 37.7; P=0.002), but the difference in difference was not significant (2.1, 0.4 to 11.1; P=0.236). There were no notable or significant changes in the pattern of prescribing errors, either over time or between control and SPI2 hospitals. Two items of medical history taking (exercise tolerance and occupation) showed significant improvement over time, across both control and SPI2 hospitals, but no additional SPI2 effect. The holistic review showed no significant changes in error rates either over time or between control and SPI2 hospitals. The explicit case note review of perioperative care showed that adherence rates for two of the four perioperative standards targeted by SPI2 were already good at baseline, exceeding 94% for antibiotic prophylaxis and 98% for deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis. Intraoperative monitoring of temperature improved over time in both groups, but this was not significant (1.8, 0.4 to 7.6; P=0.279), and there were no additional effects of SPI2. A dramatic rise in consumption of soap and alcohol hand rub was similar in control and SPI2 hospitals (P=0.760 and P=0.889, respectively), as was the corresponding decrease in rates of Clostridium difficile and meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection (P=0.652 and P=0.693, respectively). Mortality rates of medical patients included in the case note reviews in control hospitals increased from 17.3% (42/243) to 21.4% (24/112), while in SPI2 hospitals they fell from 10.3% (24/233) to 6.1% (7/114) (P=0.043). Fewer than 8% of deaths were classed as avoidable; changes in proportions could not explain the divergence of overall death rates between control and SPI2 hospitals. There was no significant difference in the rate of change in mortality in intensive care. Patients' satisfaction improved in both control and SPI2 hospitals on all dimensions, but again there were no significant changes between the two groups of hospitals. Conclusions: Many aspects of care are already good or improving across the NHS in England, suggesting considerable improvements in quality across the board. These improvements are probably due to contemporaneous policy activities relating to patient safety, including those with features similar to the SPI, and the emergence of professional consensus on some clinical processes. This phenomenon might have attenuated the incremental effect of the SPI, making it difficult to detect. Alternatively, the full impact of the SPI might be observable only in the longer term. The conclusion of this study could have been different if concurrent controls had not been used.

Talking about depression:an analogue study of physician gender and communication style on patient disclosures

Objectives: To disentangle the effects of physician gender and patient-centered communication style on patients' oral engagement in depression care. Methods: Physician gender, physician race and communication style (high patient-centered (HPC) and low patient-centered (LPC)) were manipulated and presented as videotaped actors within a computer simulated medical visit to assess effects on analogue patient (AP) verbal responsiveness and care ratings. 307 APs (56% female; 70% African American) were randomly assigned to conditions and instructed to verbally respond to depression-related questions and indicate willingness to continue care. Disclosures were coded using Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS). Results: Both male and female APs talked more overall and conveyed more psychosocial and emotional talk to HPC gender discordant doctors (all p <.05). APs were more willing to continue treatment with gender-discordant HPC physicians (p <.05). No effects were evident in the LPC condition. Conclusions: Findings highlight a role for physician gender when considering active patient engagement in patient-centered depression care. This pattern suggests that there may be largely under-appreciated and consequential effects associated with patient expectations in regard to physician gender that these differ by patient gender. Practice implications: High patient-centeredness increases active patient engagement in depression care especially in gender discordant dyads. © 2014.

Using patient knowledge for better health systems

Purpose – This paper describes a “work in progress” research project being carried out with a public health care provider in the UK, a large NHS hospital Trust. Enhanced engagement with patients is one of the Trust’s core principles, but it is recognised that much more needs to be done to achieve this, and that ICT systems may be able to provide some support. The project is intended to find ways to better capture and evaluate the “voice of the patient” in order to lead to improvements in health care quality, safety and effectiveness. Design/methodology/approach – We propose to investigate the use of a patient-orientated knowledge management system (KMS) in managing knowledge about and from patients. The study is a mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) investigation based on traditional action research, intended to answer the following three research questions: (1) How can a KMS be used as a mechanism to capture and evaluate patient experiences to provoke patient service change (2) How can the KMS assist in providing a mechanism for systematising patient engagement? (3) How can patient feedback be used to stimulate improvements in care, quality and safety? Originality/value –This methodology aims to involve patients at all phases of the study from its initial design onwards, thus leading to an understanding of the issues associated with using a KMS to manage knowledge about and for patients that is driven by the patients themselves. Practical implications – The outcomes of the project for the collaborating hospital will be firstly, a system for capturing and evaluating knowledge about and from patients, and then as a consequence, improved outcomes for both the patients and the service provider. More generally, it will produce a set of guidelines for managing patient knowledge in an NHS hospital that have been tested in one case example.

A patient's perspective:the impact of adverse drug reactions on patients and their views on reporting

What is known and objective: Adverse drug reactions to prescribed medication are relatively common events. However, the impact such reactions have on patients and their attitude to reporting such events have only been poorly explored. Previous studies relying on self-reporting patients indicate that altruism is an important factor. In the United Kingdom, patient reporting started in 2005; though, numbers of serious reports remain low. Method: A purposive sample of fifteen patients who had been admitted to an inner city hospital with an adverse drug reaction were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. Patients were asked to relate in their own words their experience of an adverse drug reaction. Patient's reactions to the information leaflet, adherence to treatment and use of other sources of information on medication were assessed. Interviews were recorded, and a thematic analysis of patients'responses was performed. Results and discussion: Analysis of the patient interviews demonstrated the reality of being admitted to hospital is often a frightening process with a significant emotional cost. Anger, isolation, resentment and blame were common factors, particularly when medicines had been prescribed for acute conditions. For patients with chronic conditions, a more phlegmatic approach was seen especially with conditions with a strong support networks. Patients felt that communication and information should have been more readily available from the health care professional who prescribed the medication, although few had read the patient information leaflet. Only a minority of patients linked the medication they had taken to the adverse event, although some had received false reassurance that the drug was not related to their illness creating additional barriers. In contrast to previous studies, many patients felt that adverse drug reporting was not their concern, particularly as they obtained little direct benefit from it. The majority of patients were unaware of the Yellow Card Scheme in the UK for patient reporting. Even when explained, the scheme was felt too cold and impersonal and not a patient's 'job'. What is new and conclusion: Patients having a severe adverse drug reaction following an acute illness felt negative emotions towards their health care provider. Those with a chronic condition rationalized the event and coped better with its impact. Neither group felt that reporting the adverse reaction was their responsibility. Encouraging patients to report remains important but expecting patients to report solely for altruistic purposes may be unrealistic. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Does anticholinergics drug burden relate to global neuro-disability outcome measures and length of hospital stay?

Primary objective: To assess the relationship between disability, length of stay (LOS) and anticholinergic burden (ACB) with people following acquired brain or spinal cord injury. Research design: A retrospective case note review assessed total rehabilitation unit admission. Methods and procedures: Assessment of 52 consecutive patients with acquired brain/spinal injury and neuropathy in an in-patient neuro-rehabilitation unit of a UK university hospital. Data analysed included: Northwick Park Dependency Score (NPDS), Rehabilitation complexity Scale (RCS), Functional Independence Measure and Functional Assessment Measure FIM-FAM (UK version 2.2), LOS and ACB. Outcome was different in RCS, NPDS and FIM-FAM between admission and discharge. Main outcomes and results: A positive change was reported in ACB results in a positive change in NPDS, with no significant effect on FIM-FAM, either Motor or Cognitive, or on the RCS. Change in ACB correlated to the length of hospital stay (regression correlation = −6.64; SE = 3.89). There was a significant harmful impact of increase in ACB score during hospital stay, from low to high ACB on NPDS (OR = 9.65; 95% CI = 1.36–68.64) and FIM-FAM Total scores (OR = 0.03; 95% CI = 0.002–0.35). Conclusions: There was a statistically significant correlation of ACB and neuro-disability measures and LOS amongst this patient cohort.

Patient experiences of serious adverse drug reactions and their attitudes to medicines:a qualitative study of survivors of Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis in the UK

Background: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) cause significant morbidity and mortality and account for around 6.5% of hospital admissions. Patient experiences of serious ADRs and their long-term impact on patients' lives, including their influence on current attitudes towards medicines, have not been previously explored. Objective: The aim of the study was to explore the experiences, beliefs, and attitudes of survivors of serious ADRs, using drug-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) as a paradigm. Methods: A retrospective, qualitative study was undertaken using detailed semi-structured interviews. Fourteen adult survivors of SJS and TEN, admitted to two teaching hospitals in the UK, one the location of a tertiary burns centre, were interviewed. Interview transcripts were independently analysed by three different researchers and themes emerging from the text identified. Results: All 14 patients were aware that their condition was drug induced, and all but one knew the specific drug(s) implicated. Several expressed surprise at the perceived lack of awareness of the ADR amongst healthcare professionals, and described how the ADR was mistaken for another condition. Survivors believed that causes of the ADR included (i) being given too high a dose of the drug; (ii) medical staff ignoring existing allergies; and (iii) failure to monitor blood tests. Only two believed that the reaction was unavoidable. Those who believed that the condition could have been avoided had less trust in healthcare professionals. The ADR had a persisting impact on their current lives physically and psychologically. Many now avoided medicines altogether and were fearful of becoming ill enough to need them. © 2011 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved. Conclusions: Life-threatening ADRs continued to affect patients’ lives long after the event. Patients’ beliefs regarding the cause of the ADR differed, and may have influenced their trust in healthcare professionals and medicines. We propose that clear communication during the acute phase of a serious ADR may therefore be important.

Patient/carers' recollection of medicines related information from an out-patient clinic appointment

AIM: To identify what medicines related information children/young people or their parents/carers are able to recall following an out-patient clinic appointment. METHOD: A convenience sample of patients' prescribed at least one new long-term (>6 weeks) medicine were recruited from a single UK paediatric hospital out-patient pharmacy. A face-to-face semi-structured questionnaire was administered to participants when they presented with their prescription. The questionnaire included the following themes: names of the medicines, therapeutic indication, dose regimen, duration of treatment and adverse effects.The results were analysed using Microsoft Excel 2013. RESULTS: One hundred participants consented and were included in the study. One hundred and forty-five medicines were prescribed in total. Participants were able to recall the names of 96 (66%) medicines and were aware of the therapeutic indication for 142 (97.9%) medicines. The dose regimen was accurately described for 120 (82.8%) medicines with the duration of treatment known for 132 (91%). Participants mentioned that they had been advised about side effects for 44 (30.3%) medicines. Specific counselling points recommended by the BNFc1, were either omitted or not recalled by participants for the following systemic treatments: cetirizine (1), chlorphenamine (1), desmopressin (2), hydroxyzine (2), itraconazole (1), piroxicam (2), methotrexate (1), stiripentol (1) and topiramate (1). CONCLUSION: Following an out-patient consultation, where a new medicine is prescribed, children and their parents/carers are usually able to recall the indication, dose regimen and duration of treatment. Few were able to recall, or were told about, possible adverse effects. This may include some important drug specific effects that require vigilance during treatment.Patients, along with families and carers, should be involved in the decision to prescribe a medicine.2 This includes a discussion about the benefits of the medicine on the patient's condition and possible adverse effects.2 Treatment side effects have been shown to be a factor in treatment non-adherence in paediatric long-term medical conditions.3 Practitioners should explain to patients, and their family members or carers where appropriate, how to identify and report medicines-related patient safety incidents.4 However, this study suggests that medical staff may not be comfortable discussing the adverse effects of medicines with patients or their parents/carers.Further research in to the shared decision making process in the paediatric out-patient clinic when a new long-term medicine is prescribed is required to further support medicines adherence and the patient safety agenda.

Dosage form preference consultation study in children and young adults:paving the way for patient-centred and patient-informed dosage form development

Objectives: The current study aims to evaluate dosage form preferences in children and young adults together with identifying the key pragmatic dosage form characteristics that would enable appropriate formulation of orally disintegrating tablets (ODTs). Methods: International, multisite, cross-sectional questionnaire of children and young adults aged from 6 to 18 years. Eligibility was based on age, ability to communicate and previous experience in taking medications. The study was carried out at three locations: the UK, Saudi Arabia and Jordan. The questionnaire instrument was designed for participant self-completion under supervision of the study team.Results 104 questionnaires were completed by the study cohort (n=120, response rate 87%). Results: showed that ODTs were the most preferred oral dosage forms (58%) followed by liquids (20%), tablets (12%) and capsules (11%). The preferred colours were pink or white while the preferred size was small (<8 mm) with a round shape. With regard to flavour, strawberry was the most preferred (30.8%), while orange was the least preferred (5.8%). The results also showed that the most important physical characteristics of ODTs were disintegration time followed by taste, size and flavour, respectively. Conclusions: The results of our study support the WHO's claim for a shift of paradigm from liquid towards ODTs dosage forms for drug administration to young children older than 6 years. Data from this study will also equip formulators to prioritise development of key physical/performance attributes within the delivery system.