Why don’t patients take their analgesics? A meta-ethnography assessing the perceptions of medication adherence in patients with osteoarthritis

Introduction/objectives: Whilst analgesics and medications have demonstrated efficacy for people with osteoarthritis, their effectiveness is dependent on adherence. This has previously been reported as particularly low in this population. The purpose of this meta-ethnography was to explore possible perceptions for this. Method: A systematic review of published and unpublished literature was undertaken. All qualitative studies assessing the attitudes or perceptions of people with osteoarthritis towards medication adherence were eligible. Study quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative tool. Analysis was undertaken using a meta-ethnography approach, distilling to a third order construct and developing a line of argument. Results: From 881 citations, five studies met the eligibility criteria. The meta-ethnography generated a model where medication adherence for people with osteoarthritis is perceived as a balance between the willingness or preference to take medications with the alterative being toleration of symptoms. Motivators to influence this ‘balance’ may fluctuate and change over time but include: severity of symptoms, education and understanding of osteoarthritis and current medications, or general health which may raise issues for poly-pharmacy as other medications are added or substituted into the patient’s formulary. Conclusions: Medicine adherence in people with osteoarthritis is complex, involving motivators which will fluctuate in impact on individuals at different points along the disease progression. Awareness of each motivator may better inform clinicians as to what education, support or change in prescription practice should be adopted to ensure that medicine adherence is individualised to better promote long-term behaviour change

Exploring men's and women's experiences of depression and engagement with health professionals: more similarities than differences? A qualitative interview study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It is argued that the ways in which women express emotional distress mean that they are more likely to be diagnosed with depression, while men's relative lack of articulacy means their depression is hidden. This may have consequences for communicating with health professionals. The purpose of this analysis was to explore how men and women with depression articulate their emotional distress, and examine whether there are gender differences or similarities in the strategies that respondents found useful when engaging with health professionals.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In-depth qualitative interviews with 22 women and 16 men in the UK who identified themselves as having had depression, recruited through general practitioners, psychiatrists and support groups.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found gender similarities and gender differences in our sample. Both men and women found it difficult to recognise and articulate mental health problems and this had consequences for their ability to communicate with health professionals. Key gender differences noted were that men tended to value skills which helped them to talk while women valued listening skills in health professionals, and that men emphasised the importance of getting practical results from talking therapies in their narratives, as opposed to other forms of therapy which they conceptualised as 'just talking'. We also found diversity among women and among men; some respondents valued a close personal relationship with health professionals, while others felt that this personal relationship was a barrier to communication and preferred 'talking to a stranger'.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our findings suggest that there is not a straightforward relationship between gender and engagement with health professionals for people with depression. Health professionals need to be sensitive to patients who have difficulties in expressing emotional distress and critical of gender stereotypes which suggest that women invariably find it easy to express emotional distress and men invariably find it difficult. In addition it is important to recognise that, for a minority of patients, a personal relationship with health professionals can act as a barrier to the disclosure of emotional distress.</p

Estimating the Effects of Immigration Status on Mental Health Care Utilizations in the United States

Immigration status is a likely deterrent of mental health care utilization in the United States. Using the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and National Health Interview survey from 2002 to 2006, multivariable logistic regressions were used to estimate the effects of immigration status on mental health care utilization among patients with depression or anxiety disorders. Multivariate regressions showed that immigrants were significantly less likely to take any prescription drugs, but not significantly less likely to have any physician visits compared to US-born citizens. Results also showed that improving immigrants’ health care access and health insurance coverage could potentially reduce disparities between US-born citizens and immigrants by 14–29% and 9–28% respectively. Policy makers should focus on expanding the availability of regular sources of health care and immigrant health coverage to reduce disparities on mental health care utilization. Targeted interventions should also focus on addressing immigrants’ language barriers, and providing culturally appropriate services

Depression symptomatology and diagnosis: discordance between patients and physicians in primary care settings

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To examine the agreement between depression symptoms using an assessment tool (PHQ-9), and physician documentation of the same symptoms during a clinic visit, and then to examine how the presence of these symptoms affects depression diagnosis in primary care settings.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Interviewer administered surveys and medical record reviews. A total of 304 participants were recruited from 2321 participants screened for depression at two large urban primary care community settings.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 2321 participants screened for depression 304 were positive for depression and of these 75.3% (n = 229) were significantly depressed (PHQ-9 score ≥ 10). Of these, 31.0% were diagnosed by a physician with a depressive disorder. A total of 57.6% (n = 175) of study participants had both significant depression symptoms and functional impairment. Of these 37.7% were diagnosed by physicians as depressed. Cohen's Kappa analysis, used to determine the agreement between depression symptoms elicited using the PHQ-9 and physician documentation of these symptoms showed only slight agreement (0.001–0.101) for all depression symptoms using standard agreement rating scales. Further analysis showed that only suicidal ideation and hypersomnia or insomnia were associated with an increased likelihood of physician depression diagnosis (OR 5.41 P sig < .01 and (OR 2.02 P sig < .05 respectively). Other depression symptoms and chronic medical conditions had no affect on physician depression diagnosis.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Two-thirds of individuals with depression are undiagnosed in primary care settings. While functional impairment increases the rate of physician diagnosis of depression, the agreement between a structured assessment and physician elicited and or documented symptoms during a clinical encounter is very low. Suicidality, hypersomnia and insomnia are associated with an increase in the rate of depression diagnosis even when physician and self report of the symptom differ. Interventions that emphasize the use of routine structured screening of primary care patients might also improve the rate of diagnosis of depression in these settings. Further studies are needed to explore depression symptom assessment during physician patient encounter in primary care settings.</p

Barriers to participation in mental health research: are there specific gender, ethnicity and age related barriers?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It is well established that the incidence, prevalence and presentation of mental disorders differ by gender, ethnicity and age, and there is evidence that there is also differential representation in mental health research by these characteristics. The aim of this paper is to a) review the current literature on the nature of barriers to participation in mental health research, with particular reference to gender, age and ethnicity; b) review the evidence on the effectiveness of strategies used to overcome these barriers.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Studies published up to December 2008 were identified using MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE using relevant mesh headings and keywords.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Forty-nine papers were identified. There was evidence of a wide range of barriers including transportation difficulties, distrust and suspicion of researchers, and the stigma attached to mental illness. Strategies to overcome these barriers included the use of bilingual staff, assistance with travel, avoiding the use of stigmatising language in marketing material and a focus on education about the disorder under investigation. There were very few evaluations of such strategies, but there was evidence that ethnically matching recruiters to potential participants did not improve recruitment rates. Educational strategies were helpful and increased recruitment.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Mental health researchers should consider including caregivers in recruitment procedures where possible, provide clear descriptions of study aims and describe the representativeness of their sample when reporting study results. Studies that systematically investigate strategies to overcome barriers to recruitment are needed.</p

How patients understand depression associated with chronic physical disease - A systematic review

Background: Clinicians are encouraged to screen people with chronic physical illness for depression. Screening alone may not improve outcomes, especially if the process is incompatible with patient beliefs. The aim of this research is to understand peoples beliefs about depression, particularly in the presence of chronic physical disease. Methods: A mixed method systematic review involving a thematic analysis of qualitative studies and quantitative studies of beliefs held by people with current depressive symptoms. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCHINFO, CINAHL, BIOSIS, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, UKCRN portfolio, National Research Register Archive, Clinicaltrials.gov and OpenSIGLE were searched from database inception to 31st December 2010. A narrative synthesis of qualitative and quantitative data, based initially upon illness representations and extended to include other themes not compatible with that framework. Results: A range of clinically relevant beliefs was identified from 65 studies including the difficulty in labeling depression, complex causal factors instead of the biological model, the roles of different treatments and negative views about the consequences of depression. We found other important themes less related to ideas about illness: the existence of a self-sustaining depression spiral; depression as an existential state; the ambiguous status of suicidal thinking; and the role of stigma and blame in depression. Conclusions: Approaches to detection of depression in physical illness need to be receptive to the range of beliefs held by patients. Patient beliefs have implications for engagement with depression screening

Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for pain and disability instruments in low back pain patients

BACKGROUND: The choice of an evaluative instrument has been hampered by the lack of head-to-head comparisons of responsiveness and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in subpopulations of low back pain (LBP). The objective of this study was to concurrently compare responsiveness and MCID for commonly used pain scales and functional instruments in four subpopulations of LBP patients. METHODS: The Danish versions of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the 23-item Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMQ), the physical function and bodily pain subscales of the SF36, the Low Back Pain Rating Scale (LBPRS) and a numerical rating scale for pain (0–10) were completed by 191 patients from the primary and secondary sectors of the Danish health care system. Clinical change was estimated using a 7-point transition question and a numeric rating scale for importance. Responsiveness was operationalised using standardardised response mean (SRM), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), and cut-point analysis. Subpopulation analyses were carried out on primary and secondary sector patients with LBP only or leg pain +/- LBP. RESULTS: RMQ was the most responsive instrument in primary and secondary sector patients with LBP only (SRM = 0.5–1.4; ROC = 0.75–0.94) whereas ODI and RMQ showed almost similar responsiveness in primary and secondary sector patients with leg pain (ODI: SRM = 0.4–0.9; ROC = 0.76–0.89; RMQ: SRM = 0.3–0.9; ROC = 0.72–0.88). In improved patients, the RMQ was more responsive in primary and secondary sector patients and LBP only patients (SRM = 1.3–1.7) while the RMQ and ODI were equally responsive in leg pain patients (SRM = 1.3 and 1.2 respectively). All pain measures demonstrated almost equal responsiveness. The MCID increased with increasing baseline score in primary sector and LBP only patients but was only marginally affected by patient entry point and pain location. The MCID of the percentage change score remained constant for the ODI (51%) and RMQ (38%) specifically and differed in the subpopulations. CONCLUSION: RMQ is suitable for measuring change in LBP only patients and both ODI and RMQ are suitable for leg pain patients irrespectively of patient entry point. The MCID is baseline score dependent but only in certain subpopulations. Relative change measured using the ODI and RMQ was not affected by baseline score when patients quantified an important improvement