Multilevel factors are associated with immunosuppressant nonadherence in heart transplant recipients: The international BRIGHT study

Factors at the level of family/healthcare worker, organization, and system are neglected in medication nonadherence research in heart transplantation (HTx). The 4-continent, 11-country cross-sectional Building Research Initiative Group: Chronic Illness Management and Adherence in Transplantation (BRIGHT) study used multistaged sampling to examine 36 HTx centers, including 36 HTx directors, 100 clinicians, and 1397 patients. Nonadherence to immunosuppressants\u2014defined as any deviation in taking or timing adherence and/or dose reduction\u2014was assessed using the Basel Assessment of Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medications Scale \ua9 (BAASIS \ua9 ) interview. Guided by the Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction and Bronfenbrenner's ecological model, we analyzed factors at these multiple levels using sequential logistic regression analysis (6 blocks). The nonadherence prevalence was 34.1%. Six multilevel factors were associated independently (either positively or negatively) with nonadherence: patient level: barriers to taking immunosuppressants (odds ratio [OR]: 11.48); smoking (OR: 2.19); family/healthcare provider level: frequency of having someone to help patients read health-related materials (OR: 0.85); organization level: clinicians reporting nonadherent patients were targeted with adherence interventions (OR: 0.66); pickup of medications at physician's office (OR: 2.31); and policy level: monthly out-of-pocket costs for medication (OR: 1.16). Factors associated with nonadherence are evident at multiple levels. Improving medication nonadherence requires addressing not only the patient, but also family/healthcare provider, organization, and policy levels

Validation of the patient assessment of chronic illness care (PACIC) short form scale in heart transplant recipients: The international cross-sectional bright study

Background: Transplant recipients are chronically ill patients, who require lifelong follow-up to manage co-morbidities and prevent graft loss. This necessitates a system of care that is congruent with the Chronic Care Model. The eleven-item self-report Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) scale assesses whether chronic care is congruent with the Chronic Care Model, yet its validity for heart transplant patients has not been tested. Methods: We tested the validity of the English version of the PACIC, and compared the similarity of the internal structure of the PACIC across English-speaking countries (USA, Canada, Australia and United Kingdom) and across six languages (French, German, Dutch, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese). This was done using data from the cross-sectional international BRIGHT study that included 1378 heart transplant patients from eleven countries across 4 continents. To test the validity of the instrument, confirmatory factor analyses to check the expected unidimensional internal structure, and relations to other variables, were performed. Results: Main analyses confirmed the validity of the English PACIC version for heart transplant patients. Exploratory analyses across English-speaking countries and languages also confirmed the single factorial dimension, except in Italian and Spanish. Conclusion: This scale could help healthcare providers monitor level of chronic illness management and improve transplantation care. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT01608477, first patient enrolled in March 2012, registered retrospectively: May 30, 2012

Are there differences in acute phase inflammation markers regarding the type of heart failure?

This study aimed to determine if there are differences in inflammatory markers in the acute phase between systolic heart failure and heart failure with preserved systolic function. One hundred and thirty-one patients with acute heart failure were recruited consecutively. At admission, plasma fibrinogen, C-reactive protein, sialic acid, von Willebrand factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, interleukin-6 and NTproBNP were all evaluated. If the ejection fraction was 45% or over patients were included in the HF-PSF group; the remaining patients were included in the SHF group. The HF-PSF patients were older (72±10 vs 63±12 years, P<0.001), presented a higher rate of atrial fibrillation (56.1 vs 21.3%, P<0.001), and had a lower rate of hemoglobin (12.2±2 vs 13.3±2.1 g/dL, P<0.01). No significant differences were observed in the inflammation markers analyzed among SHF and HF-PSF groups. In the acute phase of heart failure there is a marked elevation of inflammatory markers but there are no differences in the inflammatory markers analyzed between the two different types of heart failure

Sex- and age-related differences in the management and outcomes of chronic heart failure: an analysis of patients from the ESC HFA EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry

Aims: This study aimed to assess age- and sex-related differences in management and 1-year risk for all-cause mortality and hospitalization in chronic heart failure (HF) patients. Methods and results: Of 16 354 patients included in the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry, 9428 chronic HF patients were analysed [median age: 66 years; 28.5% women; mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 37%]. Rates of use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) were high (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists: 85.7%, 88.7% and 58.8%, respectively). Crude GDMT utilization rates were lower in women than in men (all differences: P\ua0 64 0.001), and GDMT use became lower with ageing in both sexes, at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. Sex was not an independent predictor of GDMT prescription; however, age >75 years was a significant predictor of GDMT underutilization. Rates of all-cause mortality were lower in women than in men (7.1% vs. 8.7%; P\ua0=\ua00.015), as were rates of all-cause hospitalization (21.9% vs. 27.3%; P\ua075 years. Conclusions: There was a decline in GDMT use with advanced age in both sexes. Sex was not an independent predictor of GDMT or adverse outcomes. However, age >75 years independently predicted lower GDMT use and higher all-cause mortality in patients with LVEF 6445%

Multilevel factors are associated with immunosuppressant nonadherence in heart transplant recipients: The international BRIGHT study

Factors at the level of family/healthcare worker, organization, and system are neglected in medication nonadherence research in heart transplantation (HTx). The 4-continent, 11-country cross-sectional Building Research Initiative Group: Chronic Illness Management and Adherence in Transplantation (BRIGHT) study used multistaged sampling to examine 36 HTx centers, including 36 HTx directors, 100 clinicians, and 1397 patients. Nonadherence to immunosuppressants-defined as any deviation in taking or timing adherence and/or dose reduction-was assessed using the Basel Assessment of Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medications Scale© (BAASIS© ) interview. Guided by the Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction and Bronfenbrenner's ecological model, we analyzed factors at these multiple levels using sequential logistic regression analysis (6 blocks). The nonadherence prevalence was 34.1%. Six multilevel factors were associated independently (either positively or negatively) with nonadherence: patient level: barriers to taking immunosuppressants (odds ratio [OR]: 11.48); smoking (OR: 2.19); family/healthcare provider level: frequency of having someone to help patients read health-related materials (OR: 0.85); organization level: clinicians reporting nonadherent patients were targeted with adherence interventions (OR: 0.66); pickup of medications at physician's office (OR: 2.31); and policy level: monthly out-of-pocket costs for medication (OR: 1.16). Factors associated with nonadherence are evident at multiple levels. Improving medication nonadherence requires addressing not only the patient, but also family/healthcare provider, organization, and policy levels

Practice patterns to improve pre and post-transplant medication adherence in heart transplant centres: a secondary data analysis of the international BRIGHT study

Background: As medication non-adherence is a major risk factor for poor post-transplant outcomes, we explored how adherence is assessed, enhanced and integrated across the transplant continuum. Aim: The aim of this study was to study practice patterns regarding pre- and post-transplant medication adherence assessment and interventions in international heart transplant centres. Methods: We used data from the Building Research Initiative Group: chronic illness management and adherence in heart transplantation (BRIGHT) study, a cross-sectional study conducted in 36 heart transplant centres in 11 countries. On a 27-item questionnaire, 100 clinicians (range one to five per centre) reported their practice patterns regarding adherence assessment and intervention strategies pre-transplant, immediately post-transplant, less than one year, and one or more year post-transplant. Educational/cognitive, counselling/behavioural and psychosocial/affective strategies were assessed. Clinicians\u2019 responses (intervention present vs. absent; or incongruence in reporting intervention) were aggregated at the centre level. Results: The adherence assessment method most commonly used along the transplant continuum was questioning patients (range 75\u201388.9%). Pre-transplant, all three categories of intervention strategy were applied. Providing reading materials (82.9%) or instructions (68.6%), involving family or support persons in education (91.4%), and establishing partnership (91.4%) were used most frequently. Post-transplant, strategies closely resembled those employed pre-transplant. Training patients (during recovery) and cueing were more often applied during hospitalisation (74.3%). After the first year post-transplant, except for motivational interviewing (25.7\u201328.6%), the number of strategies decreased. Conclusions: Across the transplant continuum, diverse adherence interventions are implemented; however, post-transplant, the frequency of adherence interventions decreases. Therefore, increased investment is necessary in long-term adherence interventions

The international prevalence and variability of nonadherence to the nonpharmacologic treatment regimen after heart transplantation: Findings from the cross-sectional BRIGHT study

Introduction: Heart transplant (HTx) recipients need to follow a complex therapeutic regimen. We assessed the international prevalence and variability in nonadherence to six nonpharmacologic treatment components (physical activity, sun protection, diet, alcohol use, nonsmoking, and outpatient follow-up visits). Methods: We used self-report data of 1397 adult HTx recipients from the 36-HTx-center, 11-country, 4-continent, cross-sectional BRIGHT study (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01608477). The nonadherence definitions used were as follows: Physical activity: 1\ua0alcoholic drink/d (women) or >2\ua0drinks/d (men); Smoking: current smokers or stopped <1\ua0year before; Follow-up visits: missing 651 of the last 5 outpatient follow-up visits. Overall prevalence figures were adjusted to avoid over- or underrepresentation of countries. Between-country variability was assessed within each treatment component via chi-square testing. Results: The adjusted study-wide nonadherence prevalence figures were as follows: 47.8% for physical activity (95% CI [45.2-50.5]), 39.9% for sun protection (95% CI [37.3-42.5]), 38.2% for diet recommendations (95% CI [35.1-41.3]), 22.9% for alcohol consumption (95% CI [20.8-25.1]), 7.4% for smoking cessation (95% CI [6.1-8.7]), and 5.7% for follow-up visits (95% CI [4.6-6.9]). Significant variability was observed between countries in all treatment components except follow-up visits. Conclusion: Nonadherence to the post-HTx nonpharmacologic treatment regimen is prevalent and shows significant variability internationally, suggesting a need for tailored adherence-enhancing interventions

Heart transplant centers with multidisciplinary team show a higher level of chronic illness management \u2013 Findings from the International BRIGHT Study

Objectives The objectives of this study were to: (1) explore the proportion of HTx centers that have a multidisciplinary team and (2) assess the relationship between multidisciplinarity and the level of chronic illness management (CIM). Background The International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) recommends a multidisciplinary approach in heart transplant (HTx) follow-up care but little is known regarding the proportion of HTx centers that meet this recommendation and the impact on patient care. HTx centers with a multidisciplinary team may offer higher levels of CIM, a care model that has the potential to improve outcomes after HTx. Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of the BRIGHT study, a cross-sectional study in 11 countries. Multidisciplinarity in the 36 HTx centers was assessed through HTx director reports and was defined as having a team that was composed of physician(s), nurse(s), and another healthcare professional (either a social worker, psychiatrist, psychologist, pharmacist, dietician, physical therapist, or occupational therapist). CIM was assessed with the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC). Multiple linear regression assessed the relationship between multidisciplinarity and the level of CIM. Results Twenty-nine (80.6%) of the HTx centers had a multidisciplinary team. Furthermore, multidisciplinarity was significantly associated with higher levels of CIM (\u3b2 = 5.2, P = 0.042). Conclusion Majority of the HTx centers follows the ISHLT recommendation for a multidisciplinary approach. Multidisciplinarity was associated with CIM and point toward a structural factor that needs to be in place for moving toward CIM

Prevalence of Medication Nonadherence to Co-medication Compared to Immunosuppressants in Heart Transplant Recipients: Findings From the International Cross-sectional BRIGHT Study.

Abstract PURPOSE: To assess and compare the prevalence of medication nonadherence (MNA) (implementation and persistence) to immunosuppressants and co-medications in heart transplant recipients. METHODS: MNA prevalence was assessed using the Basel Assessment of Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medications Scale (self-report) and compared using logistic regression in a 4-continent sample of 1397 heart transplant recipients from 36 heart transplant centers in 11 countries. FINDINGS: MNA was significantly (α = 0.05) higher to co-medications than to immunosuppressants (taking nonadherence: 23.9% vs 17.3%; odds ratio [OR] = 1.5; 95% CI, 1.30-1.73; drug holiday: 5.7% vs 1.9%; OR = 3.17; 95% CI, 2.13-4.73; dose alteration: 3.8% vs 1.6%; OR = 2.46; 95% CI, 1.49-4.06; and discontinuation: 2.6% vs 0.5%; OR = 5.15; 95% CI, 2.36-11.20). IMPLICATIONS: The observed MNA necessitates adherence-enhancing interventions encompassing the entire post-heart transplant medication regimen. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01608477