Methods: A literature search was conducted using pre-defined search terms in three scientific databases, including ScienceDirect, ProQuest and MEDLINE. Original research articles published in English between 2009 and 2020 that assessed the impact of medication regimen simplification on medication adherence in patients with long-term medical conditions were eligible for inclusion. Review articles, meta-analysis studies and conference proceedings were excluded. Data charting was done in an iterative process using a study-specific extraction form.
Results: Of the 684 studies identified through initial searches, 17 studies were included in the review. Nine studies involved simplification of medication regimen related to HIV, while three studies focused on patients with diabetes with or without coronary artery disease. The remaining five studies included medications used among elderly patients or medications related to hypertension, psychiatric disorders, glaucoma and kidney diseases. Three medication regimen simplification strategies were identified; fixed-dose combination (n = 7), once-daily dosing (n = 4) and the combination of both fixed-dose and once-daily dosing (n = 6). Overall, most of the regimen simplification strategies (14 out of 17) were found to be useful in improving medication adherence. There was no assessment of clinical outcomes in four out of 17 studies. Furthermore, more than half of the studies that assessed clinical outcomes did not show any additional impact on clinical outcomes.
Conclusion: The findings suggest that there was an equal utilization of the three main approaches of regimen simplifications; fixed-dose combination, once-daily dosing and a combination of both. Overall, most of the regimen simplification strategies were found to be effective in improving medication adherence. However, the associated improvement in medication adherence did not extend to improvement in the clinical outcomes.
Patients and methods: A focus group discussion was conducted with 12 community pharmacists. Participants were recruited using snowball sampling. Audio-recordings were transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using a thematic approach.
Results: Three themes were apparent: 1) suggestions for app design and content, 2) perceived benefits of the app, and 3) potential challenges related to the app. Participants believed the app would be able to facilitate and improve communication, and hence relationship, between pharmacists and the DHoH. Potential challenges of the app were highlighted, such as the need for manpower to manage the app, and its cost to this group of economically disadvantaged people. There were also concerns about privacy and security.
Conclusions: This study allowed community pharmacists, one of the end-users of the app, to provide feedback on the contents and design of the app, which would allow them to provide pharmaceutical care services to patients who are DHoH, and better serve them. Potential benefits and challenges of the app were also identified. Undoubtedly, through the mHealth app, community pharmacists will be better equipped to serve and communicate with the DHoH, and this will hopefully translate to improved health outcomes in these patients.
Purpose: To determine the level of adherence to opioid analgesics in patients with cancer pain and to identify factors that may influence the adherence.
Patient and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted from March to June 2018 at two tertiary care hospitals in Malaysia. Study instruments consisted of a set of validated questionnaires; the Medication Compliance Questionnaire, Brief Pain Inventory and Pain Opioid Analgesic Beliefs─Cancer scale.
Results: A total of 134 patients participated in this study. The patients' adherence scores ranged from 52-100%. Factors with a moderate, statistically significant negative correlation with adherence were negative effect beliefs (rs= -0.53, p<0.001), pain endurance beliefs (rs = -0.49, p<0.001) and the use of aqueous morphine (rs = -0.26, p=0.002). A multiple linear regression model on these predictors resulted in a final model which accounted for 47.0% of the total variance in adherence (R2 = 0.47, F (7, 126) = 15.75, p<0.001). After controlling for other variables, negative effect beliefs were the strongest contributor to the model (β = -0.39, p<0.001) and uniquely explained 12.3% of the total variance.
Conclusion: The overall adherence to opioid analgesics among Malaysian patients with cancer pain was good. Negative effects beliefs regarding cancer pain and opioids strongly predicted adherence.
Purpose: This study was conducted to explore attitude and practice on using AET among breast cancer patients in Malaysia.
Patients and Methods: Postmenopausal breast cancer patients on at least 3 months of AET attending the outpatient oncology clinic at a tertiary care hospital were interviewed. Patients underwent in-depth interviews exploring their attitude and practices while on AET using a semi-structured interview guide. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis.
Results: There were four main themes for attitude toward the use of AET: 1) benefits of using AET, 2) concerns on taking AET, 3) beliefs on alternative treatment, and 4) beliefs toward the doctor. For practice, six themes were obtained: 1) correct use of AET, 2) appointment adherence, 3) information-seeking behavior, 4) counseling services obtained, 5) experienced side effects of AET, and 6) usage of complementary and alternative medicines.
Conclusion: Several themes concerning attitude and practice of breast cancer patients receiving AET were identified, which may be addressed during treatment consultations in clinical practice.
Methods: We searched three electronic databases for studies examining patients' satisfaction and preferences for using telemedicine in type 2 diabetes. An evaluation matrix was developed to collect the data from the included articles. A total of 20 articles were identified and data on the key outcomes identified were narratively synthesized.
Results: Patients were generally satisfied with the use of telemedicine for management of type 2 diabetes. Users reported that telemedicine was beneficial as it provided constant monitoring, improved access to healthcare providers, and reduced waiting time. When adopting a telemedicine platform, most patients expressed preference for mobile health (mHealth) as the telemedicine modality, especially if it has been endorsed by their physician. To improve usability and sustainability, patients suggested that modules related to diabetes education be enhanced, together with sufficient technical and physician support when adopting telemedicine. Patients also expressed the importance of having a sufficiently flexible platform that could be adapted to their needs.
Conclusion: Personalized telemedicine strategies coupled with appropriate physician endorsement greatly influences a patient's decision to undertake telemedicine. Future work should focus on improving telemedicine infrastructure and increasing physician's involvement, especially during the implementation phase.
Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 278 pharmacy clients who were using health apps on their smartphones. A survey was developed, piloted, and rolled out, comprised of socio-demographic characteristics, information regarding the common types and the pattern of health app use, the benefits of health apps, and issues that users faced while using these apps. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS version 21.
Results: The mean (±SD) age of health app users was 29.8 (±11.74) years old, and over half of them (51.8%) were male, while less than half were female (48.2%). There were 48 different types of mobile health apps used by the participants in this study. The two most common were multi-purpose general health apps (53.6%) and fitness apps (38.1%). In terms of pattern of use, 33.5% of the participants reported using their health apps daily, 36.7% at least once weekly, and 25.2% monthly. The main benefits reported by the users were tracking of health status (47%), motivation (41%), and knowledge about health and fitness (9%). The main issues reported by the participants included inaccuracy of the app (24%), inconvenience (20.7%), and not being user-friendly (18.5%).
Conclusion: The study showed that the participants used many different types of mobile health apps for several purposes, including general health, wellness, fitness, and self-management of diseases. These apps helped the participants to track their health-related activities and motivated them to maintain their wellness and fitness. Further areas of improvement were identified to ensure evidence-based and effective utilization of apps to achieve required health outcomes.
Patients and Methods: This study was carried out from March to October 2018 at a tertiary hospital in Kuala Lumpur. The SQOP was translated from English to Malay according to international guidelines. Malay-speaking postmenopausal women ≥50 years were recruited and randomized into control and intervention groups. The intervention group received an osteoporosis prevention information booklet and a 15-minute pharmacist counselling session. All patients were asked to answer the SQOP-M questionnaire at baseline and two weeks later. The control group received the intervention after the study was completed.
Results: Overall, 230/348 patients were recruited (C=115, I=115, response rate=66.1%). Exploratory factor analysis extracted four domains. Cronbach's α ranged from 0.230 to 0.938. Kappa measurement of agreement values ranged from 0.124 to 0.627, where 10/23 (43.5%) items were in moderate to substantial agreement. Wilcoxon signed rank test values were statistically significant (p<0.005) for 4/23 items. Item 17 was an optional question and excluded from analysis. Total satisfaction score was significantly higher for intervention group patients [76.9 (47.6-53.9) vs 50.4 (47.6-53.9), p<0.001] indicating higher satisfaction compared to control group.
Conclusion: The SQOP-M was found to be valid and reliable in assessing patient satisfaction of osteoporosis screening and prevention services provided to Malay-speaking patients in Malaysia.
Aim: To translate, culturally adapt, and validate the English version of GMAS into the Nepalese language to measure medication adherence among chronic illness patients.
Methods: The study was conducted among patients with chronic diseases in both hospital and community pharmacies of Nepal. The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Good Practice Guideline for linguistic translation and cultural adaptation was used to translate and culturally adapt the English version of GMAS into the Nepalese version. The translated version was validated amongst patients with chronic diseases in Nepal. Exploratory factor analysis was carried out using principal component analysis with varimax rotation. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were analysed.
Results: A total of 220 (53.6% females, and 51.4% of 51 to 70 aged patients) patients with chronic diseases participated in the study. The majority of patients took two medications (27.3%) from six months to five and half years (68.2%). Kaiser Meyer Olkin was found to be 0.83. A principal axis factor analysis was conducted on the 3 items of GMAS without and with orthogonal rotation (varimax). The scree plot showed an inflexion on the third item that meant three components were present. The overall Cronbach's alpha value of the full-phase study was 0.82.
Conclusion: The General Medication Adherence Scale was successfully translated into the Nepalese language, culturally adapted, and validated amongst chronic diseases patients of Nepal. Therefore, the GMAS-Nepalese version can be used to evaluate medication adherence among Nepalese-speaking patients with chronic disease.
Methods: We developed a patient-centered PrEP DA for women in addiction treatment. In a pilot randomized preference trial, we compared the DA to enhanced standard of care (eSOC) providing standardized information. The primary outcome was opting to receive more information through the DA; we also assessed the impact of the DA on PrEP decisional preference and PrEP uptake over 12 months.
Results: A total of 164 enrolled participants (DA: 83; eSOC: 81) were similar in terms of HIV risk and demographics, which are representative of women in addiction treatment programs nationally, and most (92%) had opioid use disorder. Half of participants were PrEP eligible, though 37% underestimated their personal HIV risk. Independent correlates of selecting the PrEP DA relative to eSOC included higher alcohol use severity (aOR 4.13, 95% CI 1.05-16.28, p=0.04) and perception of high risk for HIV (aOR 2.95, 95% CI 1.19-7.35, p=0.02). For those selecting the DA, interest in PrEP increased significantly from 25% to 89%. DA participants were also significantly more likely than eSOC participants to see a provider for PrEP during follow-up (15.7% vs 6.2%; p=0.05).
Conclusion: Half of the women selected to use the DA, and those who did significantly increased their engagement in the HIV prevention cascade through increased interest in and initiation of PrEP. Future iterations should accelerate the HIV prevention cascade for women with SUDs by integrating PrEP decision aids into existing addiction treatment services and actively linking women to PrEP.
Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study at the Oncology Clinic, Hospital Kuala Lumpur was conducted from March to August 2018. All patients with metastatic and/or unresectable GIST aged ≥18 years old and on at least 3 months of imatinib were included. Adherence to imatinib was assessed using the 10-item validated Medication Compliance Questionnaire, with a score of <100% indicating non-adherence. Non-adherence predictors were determined by multiple logistic regressions. HRQOL was evaluated by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). The difference in the mean HRQOL scores between adherent and non-adherent groups was determined by multivariate analysis of variance.
Results: A total of 89 patients were enrolled, of which 49 (55.1%) were considered non-adherent. The significant predictors of non-adherence were age (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.93; CI 0.89-0.98; P = 0.007), presence of nausea and vomiting (OR 5.63; CI 1.25-25.27; P = 0.024), and presence of comorbidities (OR 4.56; CI 1.44-14.40; P = 0.010). Patients who were in the adherent group showed significantly better score in overall HRQOL, F (15, 73) = 2.09, P < 0.02; Pillai's trace = 0.3, partial eta squared = 0.30.
Conclusion: Non-adherence to long-term treatment with imatinib among patients with GIST should not be underestimated. Significant predictors of non-adherence among this population are younger age, presence of nausea and vomiting, as well as comorbidities. Patients with good adherence portrayed better HRQOL.
Subjects and methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among patients with chronic diseases and pharmacists from three public hospitals in Malaysia. The Revised United States Leeds Attitudes toward Concordance (RUS-LATCon) was used to measure attitudes toward concordance in both patients and pharmacists. Patients also rated their perceived level of involvement in decision making and completed the Decision Self-Efficacy scale. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and independent t-test were used to determine significant differences between different subgroups on attitudes toward concordance, and multiple linear regression was performed to find the predictors of patients' self-efficacy in decision making.
Results: A total of 389 patients and 93 pharmacists participated in the study. Pharmacists and patients scored M=3.92 (SD=0.37) and M=3.84 (SD=0.46) on the RUS-LATCon scale, respectively. Seven items were found to be significantly different between pharmacists and patients on the subscale level. Patients who felt fully involved in decision making (M=3.94, SD=0.462) scored significantly higher on attitudes toward concordance than those who felt partially involved (M=3.82, SD=0.478) and not involved at all (M=3.68, SD=0.471; p<0.001). Patients had an average score of 76.7% (SD=14.73%) on the Decision Self-Efficacy scale. In multiple linear regression analysis, ethnicity, number of medications taken by patients, patients' perceived level of involvement, and attitudes toward concordance are significant predictors of patients' self-efficacy in decision making (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Patients who felt involved in their consultations had more positive attitudes toward concordance and higher confidence in making an informed decision. Further study is recommended on interventions involving pharmacists in supporting patients' involvement in medication-related decision making.
Methods: This study compares innovator and generic medicine prices to estimate treatment affordability in the private sector. Private hospitals and community retail pharmacies were examined from 2011 to 2015. Data were collected on the basis of recommendations by the World Health Organization's Health Action International.
Results: The markup of generic medicines was significantly higher than that of innovator medicines during the study period (p<0.001). While the markup of generic medicine was 31%-402% (36%-171% and 31%-402% for core and supplementary list items), that of innovator medicine was 24%-86% (28%-86% and 24%-80% for core and supplementary list items). There was no significant increase in the median price ratio for 11 selected generic medicines (from 1.8±3.9 to 2.9±8.2) (p>0.05). However, the median price ratio of the 11 innovator medicines significantly increased (from 4.9±6.1 to 11.2±20.3) (p=0.045). Affordability of all generic medicines was below the 2-day wage for treatment, with captopril (25 mg tablet) reporting the highest cost (1.1-1.7-day wages). Among innovator medicines, omeprazole (20 mg capsule; 6.2-7.0 days' wages) reported the highest median treatment cost.
Conclusion: There is a need for policies to control national drug prices, to ensure medicine prices are monitored. This can help keep out-of-pocket expenses, especially in middle-income countries such as Malaysia, at a minimal in the private sector.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Sulaimani Blood Bank, during the period of April 1, 2016 to March 28, 2017, on convenient samples of 100 regular and 100 first-time blood donors. Donor particulars were obtained from blood bank records. The cholesterol, triglyceride, low-density lipoprotein, ferritin, vitamin D3, and uric acid concentrations of blood samples were determined.
Results: The main reason for blood donation by regular blood donors was headache (45%), while for the first-timers it was to help relatives (31%). The low-density lipoprotein and ferritin concentrations were significantly (p=0.001) lower in the blood of regular donors than first-timers.
Conclusion: The study shows that regular blood donation is beneficial for the maintenance of health of donors.
Method: Potential studies were identified through a systematic search of Scopus, Science Direct, Google Scholar, and PubMed. The keywords used to identify relevant articles were "adherence," "AED," "epilepsy," "non-adherence," and "complementary and alternative medicine." An article was included in the review if the study met the following criteria: 1) conducted in epilepsy patients, 2) conducted in patients aged 18 years and above, 3) conducted in patients prescribed AEDs, and 4) patients' adherence to AEDs.
Results: A total of 3,330 studies were identified and 30 were included in the final analysis. The review found that the AED non-adherence rate reported in the studies was between 25% and 66%. The percentage of CAM use was found to be between 7.5% and 73.3%. The most common reason for inadequate AED therapy and higher dependence on CAM was the patients' belief that epilepsy had a spiritual or psychological cause, rather than primarily being a disease of the brain. Other factors for AED non-adherence were forgetfulness, specific beliefs about medications, depression, uncontrolled recent seizures, and frequent medication dosage.
Conclusion: The review found a high prevalence of CAM use and non-adherence to AEDs among epilepsy patients. However, a limited number of studies have investigated the association between CAM usage and AED adherence. Future studies may wish to explore the influence of CAM use on AED medication adherence.