Reimbursed medication adherence enhancing interventions in 12 european countries:Current state of the art and future challenges

Background: Medication non-adherence jeopardises the effectiveness of chronic therapies and negatively affects financial sustainability of healthcare systems. Available medication adherence-enhancing interventions (MAEIs) are utilised infrequently, and even more rarely reimbursed. The aim of this paper was to review reimbursed MAEIs across selected European countries. Methods: Data on reimbursed MAEIs were collected from European countries at the ENABLE Cost Action expert meeting in September 2021. The identified MAEIs were analysed and clustered according to their characteristics, direct vs. indirect relation to adherence, and the targeted adherence phase. Results: Out of 12 contributing countries, 10 reported reimbursed MAEIs, 28 in total, of which 20 were identified as MAEIs targeting adherence directly. Reimbursed MAEIs were most often performed by either doctors (n = 6), nurses (n = 6), or pharmacists (n = 3). The most common types of MAEIs were education (n = 6), medication regimen management (n = 5), and adherence monitoring feedback (n = 4). Only seven reimbursed MAEIs were technology-mediated, whereas 11 addressed two interlinked phases of medication adherence, i.e., implementation and persistence. Conclusion: Our review highlights the scarcity of reimbursed MAEIs across the selected European countries, and calls for their more frequent use and reimbursement

A case study of polypharmacy management in nine European countries: Implications for change management and implementation

BackgroundMultimorbidity and its associated polypharmacy contribute to an increase in adverse drug events, hospitalizations, and healthcare spending. This study aimed to address: what exists regarding polypharmacy management in the European Union (EU); why programs were, or were not, developed; and, how identified initiatives were developed, implemented, and sustained.MethodsChange management principles (Kotter) and normalization process theory (NPT) informed data collection and analysis. Nine case studies were conducted in eight EU countries: Germany (Lower Saxony), Greece, Italy (Campania), Poland, Portugal, Spain (Catalonia), Sweden (Uppsala), and the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland and Scotland). The workflow included a review of country/region specific polypharmacy policies, key informant interviews with stakeholders involved in policy development and implementation and, focus groups of clinicians and managers. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis of individual cases and framework analysis across cases.ResultsPolypharmacy initiatives were identified in five regions (Catalonia, Lower Saxony, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Uppsala) and included all care settings. There was agreement, even in cases without initiatives, that polypharmacy is a significant issue to address. Common themes regarding the development and implementation of polypharmacy management initiatives were: locally adapted solutions, organizational culture supporting innovation and teamwork, adequate workforce training, multidisciplinary teams, changes in workflow, redefinition of roles and responsibilities of professionals, policies and legislation supporting the initiative, and data management and information and communication systems to assist development and implementation. Depending on the setting, these were considered either facilitators or barriers to implementation.ConclusionWithin the studied EU countries, polypharmacy management was not widely addressed. These results highlight the importance of change management and theory-based implementation strategies, and provide examples of polypharmacy management initiatives that can assist managers and policymakers in developing new programs or scaling up existing ones, particularly in places currently lacking such initiatives

Factors affecting the opinions of family physicians regarding generic drugs – a questionnaire based study

A range of factors are believed to exert a negative influence on opinions of physicians about generic drugs.The aim of this study was to survey the opinions of primary care doctors on generics, and determine the factors which may affect them. A questionnaire comprising thirty eight questions was distributed among primary care doctors working in seventy out-patient clinics of the Lodzkie province, Poland, during the period of January 1, 2010 – December 31, 2010. A total of170 of 183 participants completed the survey (average age 48.5; 70.0% women): a 92.9%response rate. While 38.8% of physicians claimed that generics were worse than brand name drugs, 54.1% considered them to be better. However, 36.5% of the doctors did not choose generics for their own use. Two key opinions were identified among the responses concerning the effectiveness of generic drugs: use of generic drugs by the physician (p<0.001), and their opinion that pharmacists do inform patients about generic drugs (p<0.05). Although existing evidence confirms that generic and brand name drugs are equally effective, many physicians doubt this, which prevents them from being used as cost effective drug therapy. In order to increase healthcare savings through the use of generics, these factors should be addressed: for example, convincing a physician to adopt generics for personal use may be an efficient way to support more cost effective treatment of his patients

Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Improvement of Medication Adherence

Poor adherence to medications is a significant problem that leads to increased morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Recommended approaches to address medication adherence vary, and existing practice guidelines are unclear.; This review evaluated clinical practice guidelines designed to help health care providers address patients' medication adherence.; Multiple search methods were used to identify national or international guidelines addressing medication adherence. We included guidelines published in English, as well as guidelines with an English-language summary or translation.; We identified 23 guidelines of varying detail and quality. Recommendations were categorized as assessment strategies (n = 20 guidelines); educational strategies (n = 18); behavioral strategies (n = 17); therapeutic relationship, communication, and provider factors (n = 19); and addressing outside influences/co-morbidities (n = 10).; Future guidelines should be more clearly guided by research findings and comparative effectiveness methods. When implemented, guidelines will facilitate health care providers and health systems in supporting optimal adherence and improved health outcomes

Guidance to manage inappropriate polypharmacy in older people: systematic review and future developments

Introduction: Single disease state led evidence-based guidelines do not provide sufficient coverage of issues of multimorbidities, with the cumulative impact of recommendations often resulting in overwhelming medicines burden. Inappropriate polypharmacy increases the likelihood of adverse drug events, drug interactions and non-adherence.Areas covered: A detailed description of a pan-European initiative, ‘Stimulating Innovation Management of Polypharmacy and Adherence in the Elderly, SIMPATHY’, which is a project funded by the European Commission to support innovation across the European Union. This includes a systematic review of the literature aiming to summarize and review critically current policies and guidelines on polypharmacy management in older people. The policy driven, evidence-based approach to managing inappropriate polypharmacy in Scotland is described, with consideration of a change management strategy based on Kotter’s eight step process for leading sustainable change.Expert opinion: The challenges around promoting appropriate polypharmacy are on many levels, primarily clinical, organisational and political, all of which any workable solution will need to address. To be effective, safe and efficient, any programme that attempts to deal with the complexities of prescribing in this population must be patient-centred, clinically robust, multidisciplinary and designed to fit into the healthcare system in which it is delivered

Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for the improvement of medication adherence

Poor adherence to medications is a significant problem that leads to increased morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Recommended approaches to address medication adherence vary, and existing practice guidelines are unclear.; This review evaluated clinical practice guidelines designed to help health care providers address patients' medication adherence.; Multiple search methods were used to identify national or international guidelines addressing medication adherence. We included guidelines published in English, as well as guidelines with an English-language summary or translation.; We identified 23 guidelines of varying detail and quality. Recommendations were categorized as assessment strategies (n = 20 guidelines); educational strategies (n = 18); behavioral strategies (n = 17); therapeutic relationship, communication, and provider factors (n = 19); and addressing outside influences/co-morbidities (n = 10).; Future guidelines should be more clearly guided by research findings and comparative effectiveness methods. When implemented, guidelines will facilitate health care providers and health systems in supporting optimal adherence and improved health outcomes

Identification and Assessment of Adherence-Enhancing Interventions in Studies Assessing Medication Adherence Through Electronically Compiled Drug Dosing Histories: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to medications is prevalent across all medical conditions that include ambulatory pharmacotherapy and is thus a major barrier to achieving the benefits of otherwise effective medicines. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to identify and to compare the efficacy of strategies and components thereof that improve implementation of the prescribed drug dosing regimen and maintain long-term persistence, based on quantitative evaluation of effect sizes across the aggregated trials. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials that tested the efficacy of adherence-enhancing strategies with self-administered medications. The searches were limited to papers in the English language and were included from database inception to 31 December 2011. STUDY SELECTION: Our review included randomized controlled trials in which adherence was assessed by electronically compiled drug dosing histories. Five thousand four hundred studies were screened. Eligibility assessment was performed independently by two reviewers. A structured data collection sheet was developed to extract data from each study. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The adherence-enhancing components were classified in eight categories. Quality of the papers was assessed using the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines to assess potential bias. A combined adherence outcome was derived from the different adherence variables available in the studies by extracting from each paper the available adherence summary variables in a pre-defined order (correct dosing, taking adherence, timing adherence, percentage of adherent patients). To study the association between the adherence-enhancing components and their effect on adherence, a linear meta-regression model, based on mean adherence point estimates, and a meta-analysis were conducted. RESULTS: Seventy-nine clinical trials published between 1995 and December 2011 were included in the review. Patients randomized to an intervention group had an average combined adherence outcome of 74.3 %, which was 14.1 % higher than in patients randomized to the control group (60.2 %). The linear meta-regression analysis with stepwise variable selection estimated an 8.8 % increase in adherence when the intervention included feedback to the patients of their recent dosing history (EM-feedback) (p < 0.01) and a 5.0 % increase in adherence when the intervention included a cognitive-educational component (p = 0.02). In addition, the effect of interventions on adherence decreased by 1.1 % each month. Sensitivity analysis by selecting only high-quality papers confirmed the robustness of the model. The random effects model in the meta-analysis, conducted on 48 studies, confirmed the above findings and showed that the improvement in adherence was 19.8 % (95 % CI 10.7-28.9 %) among patients receiving EM-feedback, almost double the improvement in adherence for studies that did not include this type of feedback [10.3 % (95 % CI 7.5-13.1 %)] (p < 0.01). The improvement in adherence was 16.1 % (95 % CI 10.7-21.6 %) in studies that tested cognitive-educational components versus 10.1 % (95 % CI 6.6-13.6 %) in studies that did not include this type of intervention (p = 0.04). Among 57 studies measuring clinical outcomes, only 8 reported a significant improvement in clinical outcome. LIMITATIONS: Despite a common measurement, the meta-analysis was limited by the heterogeneity of the pooled data and the different measures of medication adherence. The funnel plot showed a possible publication bias in studies with high variability of the intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the statistical heterogeneity among the studies identified, and potential publication bias, the evidence from our meta-analysis suggests that EM-feedback and cognitive-educational interventions are potentially effective approaches to enhance patient adherence to medications. The limitations of this research highlight the urgent need to define guidelines and study characteristics for research protocols that can guide researchers in designing studies to assess the effects of adherence-enhancing interventions.status: publishe

Identification and Assessment of Adherence-Enhancing Interventions in Studies Assessing Medication Adherence Through Electronically Compiled Drug Dosing Histories: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Non-adherence to medications is prevalent across all medical conditions that include ambulatory pharmacotherapy and is thus a major barrier to achieving the benefits of otherwise effective medicines.; The objective of this systematic review was to identify and to compare the efficacy of strategies and components thereof that improve implementation of the prescribed drug dosing regimen and maintain long-term persistence, based on quantitative evaluation of effect sizes across the aggregated trials.; MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials that tested the efficacy of adherence-enhancing strategies with self-administered medications. The searches were limited to papers in the English language and were included from database inception to 31 December 2011.; Our review included randomized controlled trials in which adherence was assessed by electronically compiled drug dosing histories. Five thousand four hundred studies were screened. Eligibility assessment was performed independently by two reviewers. A structured data collection sheet was developed to extract data from each study.; The adherence-enhancing components were classified in eight categories. Quality of the papers was assessed using the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines to assess potential bias. A combined adherence outcome was derived from the different adherence variables available in the studies by extracting from each paper the available adherence summary variables in a pre-defined order (correct dosing, taking adherence, timing adherence, percentage of adherent patients). To study the association between the adherence-enhancing components and their effect on adherence, a linear meta-regression model, based on mean adherence point estimates, and a meta-analysis were conducted.; Seventy-nine clinical trials published between 1995 and December 2011 were included in the review. Patients randomized to an intervention group had an average combined adherence outcome of 74.3 %, which was 14.1 % higher than in patients randomized to the control group (60.2 %). The linear meta-regression analysis with stepwise variable selection estimated an 8.8 % increase in adherence when the intervention included feedback to the patients of their recent dosing history (EM-feedback) (p &lt; 0.01) and a 5.0 % increase in adherence when the intervention included a cognitive-educational component (p = 0.02). In addition, the effect of interventions on adherence decreased by 1.1 % each month. Sensitivity analysis by selecting only high-quality papers confirmed the robustness of the model. The random effects model in the meta-analysis, conducted on 48 studies, confirmed the above findings and showed that the improvement in adherence was 19.8 % (95 % CI 10.7-28.9 %) among patients receiving EM-feedback, almost double the improvement in adherence for studies that did not include this type of feedback [10.3 % (95 % CI 7.5-13.1 %)] (p &lt; 0.01). The improvement in adherence was 16.1 % (95 % CI 10.7-21.6 %) in studies that tested cognitive-educational components versus 10.1 % (95 % CI 6.6-13.6 %) in studies that did not include this type of intervention (p = 0.04). Among 57 studies measuring clinical outcomes, only 8 reported a significant improvement in clinical outcome.; Despite a common measurement, the meta-analysis was limited by the heterogeneity of the pooled data and the different measures of medication adherence. The funnel plot showed a possible publication bias in studies with high variability of the intervention effect.; Notwithstanding the statistical heterogeneity among the studies identified, and potential publication bias, the evidence from our meta-analysis suggests that EM-feedback and cognitive-educational interventions are potentially effective approaches to enhance patient adherence to medications. The limitations of this research highlight the urgent need to define guidelines and study characteristics for research protocols that can guide researchers in designing studies to assess the effects of adherence-enhancing interventions

A modified Delphi study to determine the level of consensus across the European Union on the structures, processes and desired outcomes of the management of polypharmacy in older people

BackgroundInappropriate use of multiple medicines (inappropriate polypharmacy) is a major challenge in older people with consequences of increased prevalence and severity of adverse drug reactions and interactions, and reduced medicines adherence. The aim of this study was to determine the levels of consensus amongst key stakeholders in the European Union (EU) in relation to aspects of the management of polypharmacy in older people.MethodsForty-six statements were developed on aspects of healthcare structures, processes and desired outcomes, with consensus defined at ? 80% agreement. Panel members were strategists (e.g. directors, leading clinicians and commissioners) from each of the 28 EU member states, with a target recruitment of five per member state. Three Delphi rounds were conducted via email, with panel members being provided with summative results and collated, anonymised comments at the commencement of Rounds 2 and 3.ResultsNinety panel members were recruited (64.3% of target), with high participation levels throughout the three Delphi rounds (91.1%, 83.3%, 72.2%). During Round 1, consensus was obtained for 27/46 statements (58.7%), with an additional two statements in Round 2 and none in Round 3. Consensus was obtained for statements relating to: potential gain arising from polypharmacy management (3/4 statements); strategic development (7/7); change management (5/7) indicator measures (4/6); legislation (0/3); awareness raising (5/5); polypharmacy reviews (5/7); and EU vision (0/7). Analysis of free text comments indicated that the vision statements were too ambitious and not achievable by the specified timeframe of 2025.ConclusionConsensus was obtained amongst key EU strategists around many aspects of polypharmacy management in older people. Notably, no consensus was achieved in relation to statements relating to the need to alter legislation in areas of healthcare delivery, remuneration and practitioner scope of practice. While the vision for the EU by 2025 was considered rather ambitious, there is great potential and clear opportunity to advance polypharmacy management throughout the EU and beyond