Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Tracy Finch, Jul 01, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
141 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Interest in patient adherence has increased in recent years, with a growing literature that shows the pervasiveness of poor adherence to appropriately prescribed medications. However, four decades of adherence research has not resulted in uniformity in the terminology used to describe deviations from prescribed therapies. The aim of this review was to propose a new taxonomy, in which adherence to medications is conceptualized, based on behavioural and pharmacological science, and which will support quantifiable parameters. A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and PsycINFO from database inception to 1 April 2009. The objective was to identify the different conceptual approaches to adherence research. Definitions were analyzed according to time and methodological perspectives. A taxonomic approach was subsequently derived, evaluated and discussed with international experts. More than 10 different terms describing medication-taking behaviour were identified through the literature review, often with differing meanings. The conceptual foundation for a new, transparent taxonomy relies on three elements, which make a clear distinction between processes that describe actions through established routines ('Adherence to medications', 'Management of adherence') and the discipline that studies those processes ('Adherence-related sciences'). 'Adherence to medications' is the process by which patients take their medication as prescribed, further divided into three quantifiable phases: 'Initiation', 'Implementation' and 'Discontinuation'. In response to the proliferation of ambiguous or unquantifiable terms in the literature on medication adherence, this research has resulted in a new conceptual foundation for a transparent taxonomy. The terms and definitions are focused on promoting consistency and quantification in terminology and methods to aid in the conduct, analysis and interpretation of scientific studies of medication adherence.
    British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 05/2012; 73(5):691-705. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04167.x · 3.69 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Low health literacy is expected to be associated with medication non-adherence and early research indicated that this might be the case. Further research suggested that the relationship may be more equivocal. Aim of the review The goal of this paper is initially to clarify whether there is a clear relationship between health literacy and non-adherence. Additionally, this review aims to identify factors that may influence that relationship and ultimately to better understand the mechanisms that may be at work in the relationship. Method English language original research or published reviews of health literacy and non-adherence to orally administered medications in adults were identified through a search of four bibliographic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and EBSCO Health). Results The search protocol produced 78 potentially relevant articles, of which 16 articles addressed factors that contribute to non-adherence and 24 articles reported on the results of research into the relationship between non-adherence and health literacy. Factors that contribute to non-adherence can be categorised into patient related factors, including patient beliefs; medication related factors; logistical factors; and factors around the patient-provider relationship. Of the 23 original research articles that investigated the relationship between non-adherence and health literacy, only five reported finding clear evidence of a relationship, four reported mixed results and 15 articles reported not finding the expected relationship. Research on possible mechanisms relating health literacy to non-adherence suggest that disease and medication knowledge are not sufficient for addressing non-adherence while self-efficacy is an important factor. Other findings suggest a possible U-shaped relationship between non-adherence and health literacy where people with low health literacy are more often non-adherent, largely unintentionally; people with moderate health literacy are most adherent; and people with high health literacy are somewhat non-adherent, sometimes due to intentional non-adherence. Conclusion It is clear that relevant research generally fails to find a significant relationship between non-adherence and health literacy. A U-shaped relationship between these two conditions would explain why linear statistical tests fail to identify a relationship across all three levels of health literacy. It can also account for the conditions under which both positive and negative relationships may be found.
    12/2013; 36(1). DOI:10.1007/s11096-013-9895-4