15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Results of a pilot cluster randomised trial of the use of a Medication Review Tool for people taking antipsychotic medication

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Government policy encourages increasing involvement of patients in their long-term care. This paper describes the development and pilot evaluation of a ‘Medication Review Tool’ designed to assist people to participate more effectively in discussions about antipsychotic drug treatment.

          Methods

          The Medication Review Tool developed consisted of a form to help patients identify pros and cons of their current antipsychotic treatment and any desired changes. It was associated with a website containing information and links about antipsychotics. For the trial, participants diagnosed with psychotic disorders were recruited from community mental health services. Cluster randomisation was used to allocate health professionals (care co-ordinators) and their associated patients to use of the Medication Review Tool or usual care. All participants had a medical consultation scheduled, and those in the intervention group completed the Medication Review Tool, with the help of their health professional prior to this, and took the completed Form into the consultation. Two follow-up interviews were conducted up to three months after the consultation. The principal outcome was the Decision Self Efficacy Scale (DSES). Qualitative feedback was collected from patients in the intervention group.

          Results

          One hundred and thirty patients were screened, sixty patients were randomised, 51 completed the first follow-up assessment and 49 completed the second. Many patients were not randomised due to the timing of their consultation, and involvement of health professionals was inconsistent. There was no difference between the groups on the DSES (-4.16 95 % CI -9.81, 1.49), symptoms, side effects, antipsychotic doses or patient satisfaction. Scores on the Medication Adherence Questionnaire indicated an increase in participants’ reported inclination to adherence in the intervention group (coefficient adjusted for baseline values -0.44; 95 % CI -0.76, -0.11), and there was a small increase in positive attitudes to antipsychotic medication (Drug Attitude Inventory, adjusted coefficient 1.65; 95 % CI -0.09, 3.40). Qualitative feedback indicated patients valued the Tool for identifying both positive and negative aspects of drug treatment.

          Conclusions

          The trial demonstrated the design was feasible, although challenges included service re-configurations and maintaining health professional involvement. Results may indicate a more intensive and sustained intervention is required to facilitate participation in decision-making for this group of patients.

          Trial registration

          Current controlled trials ISRCTN12055530, Retrospectively registered 9/12/2013.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence.

            Adherence to the medical regimen continues to rank as a major clinical problem in the management of patients with essential hypertension, as in other conditions treated with drugs and life-style modification. This article reviews the psychometric properties and tests the concurrent and predictive validity of a structured four-item self-reported adherence measure (alpha reliability = 0.61), which can be easily integrated into the medical visit. Items in the scale address barriers to medication-taking and permit the health care provider to reinforce positive adherence behaviors. Data on patient adherence to the medical regimen were collected at the end of a formalized 18-month educational program. Blood pressure measurements were recorded throughout a 3-year follow-up period. Results showed the scale to demonstrate both concurrent and predictive validity with regard to blood pressure control at 2 years and 5 years, respectively. Seventy-five percent of the patients who scored high on the four-item scale at year 2 had their blood pressure under adequate control at year 5, compared with 47% under control at year 5 for those patients scoring low (P less than 0.01).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Concurrent and Predictive Validity of a Self-reported Measure of Medication Adherence

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                j.moncrieff@ucl.ac.uk
                kiran.azam@nelft.nhs.uk
                s.johnson@ucl.ac.uk
                l.marston@ucl.ac.uk
                n.morant@ucl.ac.uk
                k.darton@mind.org.uk
                drneilwood@yahoo.co.uk
                Journal
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-244X
                4 July 2016
                4 July 2016
                2016
                : 16
                : 205
                Affiliations
                [ ]Division of Psychiatry, University College London, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7NF UK
                [ ]North East London Foundation Trust, Research & Development Department, Goodmayes Hospital, Barley Lane, Ilford, Essex IG3 8XJ UK
                [ ]Department of Primary Care and Population Health and Priment Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, Rowland Hill Street, London, NE3 2PF UK
                [ ]Mind, 15-19 Broadway, Stratford London, E15 4BQ UK
                [ ]Goodmayes Hospital, Barley Lane, Ilford, Essex IG3 8XJ UK
                Article
                921
                10.1186/s12888-016-0921-7
                4932750
                27377549
                616d9e9b-09df-4d55-86e2-965cbc664553
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 8 September 2015
                : 20 June 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research (GB);
                Award ID: PB-PG-0909-20026
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                antipsychotic drugs,schizophrenia,long-term treatment,decision-making,patient participation

                Comments

                Comment on this article