Background: Non-adherence to asthma treatment is a contributing factor for poorly controlled asthma. Aim: The aim of this systematic review is to explore patients' perceptions of their inhaled asthma treatment, and how these relate to adherence, using both qualitative and quantitative data. Methods: Pre-determined search terms and inclusion criteria were used to search electronic databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO). Two researchers screened titles and abstracts using the Rayyan web app and data were extracted in relation to psychological components (beliefs about, and attitudes towards, medicines) and adherence. Results: Of 1638 papers, 36 met the inclusion criteria. Key themes were: Perceived need for treatment -all 12 studies using the BMQ to measure patients' perceived need for treatment found that patients' beliefs about their necessity for treatment were associated with adherence-; Concerns about treatment -immediate and longterm side effects (58%), worries about safety (19%), and potential addiction to asthma medication (31%)-; and Perceived social stigma -22% of studies reported that embarrassment contributed to poor adherence. Conclusions: Acknowledging and addressing patient treatment beliefs and perceptual barriers to adherence is integral to designing adherence interventions for asthma patients. Further research is needed to better our understanding of the relationship between treatment perceptions and adherence.

Introduction: Practical adherence barriers (e.g., medication frequency) are generally more amenable to intervention than perceptual barriers (e.g., beliefs). Measures which assess adherence barriers exist, however these tend to measure a mix of factors. There is a need to identify what practical barriers are captured by current measures. Aim: To identify and synthesise the practical adherence barriers which are assessed by currently available self-or observer-report adherence measures. Methods: A search for systematic reviews of self-or observer-report report adherence measures was conducted. Three electronic databases (Embase, Ovid Medline, and PsycInfo) were searched using terms based on adherence, adherence barriers and measures. Systematic reviews reporting on adherence measures which included at least one self-or observer-report questionnaire or scale were included. Adherence measures were extracted and coded on whether they addressed perceptual or practical barriers, or both. Practical items were then analysed thematically. Results: Following screening of 272 initial abstracts, 20 full-text papers were reviewed. Four were excluded after full-text review, leaving 16 systematic reviews for data extraction. From these, 187 different adherence measures were extracted and coded, and 23 unique measures were identified as assessing practical barriers and included in the final analysis. Seven key themes were identified: formulation; instructions for use; issues with remembering; capability-knowledge and skills; financial; medication supply and social environment. Conclusion: Existing adherence measures capture a variety of practical barriers which can be grouped into seven categories. These findings may be used to inform the development of a measure of practical adherence barriers.

BackgroundAsthma is a chronic disease requiring effective self-management to control it and prevent mortality. The use of theory-informed digital interventions promoting asthma self-management is increasing. However, there is limited knowledge concerning how and to what extent psychological theory has been applied to the development of digital interventions, or how using theory impacts outcomes.ObjectiveThe study aimed to examine the use and application of theory in the development of digital interventions to enhance asthma self-management and to evaluate the effectiveness of theory-based interventions in improving adherence, self-management, and clinical outcomes.MethodsElectronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) were searched systematically using predetermined terms. Additional studies were identified by scanning references within relevant studies. Two researchers screened titles and abstracts against predefined inclusion criteria; a third resolved discrepancies. Full-text review was undertaken for relevant studies. Those meeting inclusion criteria were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Study outcomes were classified as medication adherence, self-management, asthma control, clinical markers of health, quality of life, other quality of life outcomes, and health care utilization. Effectiveness was calculated as an average outcome score based on the study’s reported significance. The Theory Coding Scheme (TCS) was used to establish the extent to which each intervention had applied theory and which theoretical constructs or behavioral determinants were addressed. Associations between TCS scores and asthma outcomes were described within a narrative synthesis.ResultsFourteen studies evaluating 14 different digital interventions were included in this review. The most commonly cited theories were Social Cognitive Theory, Health Belief Model, and Self-Efficacy Theory. A greater use of theory in the development of interventions was correlated with effective outcomes (r=.657; P=.01): only the 3 studies that met >60% of the different uses of theory assessed by the TCS were effective on all behavioral and clinical outcomes measured. None of the 11 studies that met ≤60% of the TCS criteria were fully effective; however, 3 interventions were partially effective (ie, the intervention had a significant impact on some, but not all, of the outcomes measured). Most studies lacked detail on the theoretical constructs and how they were applied to the development and application of the intervention.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that greater use of theory in the development and application of digital self-management interventions for asthma may increase their effectiveness. The application of theory alone may not be enough to yield a successful intervention, and other factors (eg, the context in which the intervention is used) should be considered. A systemati...

Background: A key driver of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is patient demand for unnecessary antibiotics, which is driven by patients’ beliefs about antibiotics and AMR. Few interventions have targeted beliefs to reduce inappropriate demand.Objective: To examine whether a brief, online algorithm-based intervention can change beliefs that may lead to inappropriate antibiotic demand (i.e. perceptions of antibiotic necessity and lack of concern about antibiotic harm).Design: Pre- and post-intervention study.Participants: Participants were 18 years or older, and residing in the United Kingdom, who self-selected to participate via Amazon mTurk, an online survey plaform, and via research networks.Intervention: Participants were presented with a hypothetical situation of cold and flu symptoms, then exposed to the intervention. The online intervention comprised: 1) a profiling tool identifying individual beliefs (antibiotic necessity, concerns, and knowledge) driving inappropriate antibiotic demand; 2) messages designed to change beliefs and knowledge (i.e. reduce antibiotic necessity, and increase antibiotic concerns and knowledge), and 3) an algorithm linking specific messages to specific beliefs and knowledge.Main measures: The profiling tool was repeated immediately after the intervention and compared with baseline scores to assess change in beliefs. A paired samples t-test was used to determine intervention effect.Key Results: A total of 100 respondents completed the study. A significant change in beliefs relating to inappropriate demand was observed after the intervention, with a reduction in beliefs about antibiotic necessity (t = 7.254; p < 0.0001), an increase in antibiotic concerns (t = −7.214; p < 0.0001), and increases in antibiotic and AMR knowledge (t = −4.651; p < 0.0001).Conclusion: This study is the first to demonstrate that patient beliefs about antibiotics and AMR associated with inappropriate demand can be changed by a brief, tailored online intervention. This has implications for the design of future interventions to reduce unnecessary antimicrobial use.

This study reports the development and validation of a new self-report measure, the Medication Practical barriers to Adherence Questionnaire (MPRAQ), which assesses practical barriers to medication adherence. Methods: The MPRAQ comprises 15 statements describing practical barriers. Responses are scored on a 5-point Likert scale; higher scores indicate more practical barriers. Initial face validity was evaluated by cognitive testing with patients from a diabetes support group. Following refinement, internal reliability and construct validity were assessed in two samples: patients recruited via Amazon mTurk and the Nivel Dutch Healthcare Consumer Panel (COPA). Respondents completed the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ-General and BMQ-Specific), and the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5). The mTurk sample also completed the Perceived Sensitivity to Medicines questionnaire (PSM) and repeated the MPRAQ 2 weeks later to assess test-retest reliability.Results: Face validity was evaluated in 15 patients (46% female; mean (SD) age 64 (12) years). A total of 184 mTurk participants completed the questionnaire (in English) and 334 in COPA (in Dutch). Internal reliability was acceptable (mTurk α = 0.89; COPA α = 0.94). Construct validity was confirmed, with significant correlation between the MPRAQ and BMQ-Specific Concerns (mTurk r = 0.546, P < .0001; COPA r = 0.370, P < .0001), BMQ-General Harm (mTurk r = 0.504, P < 0.0001; COPA r = 0.219, P < .0001), BMQ-General Overuse (mTurk r = 0.324, P < .0001; COPA r = 0.109, P = .047) and PSM (mTurk only r = 0.463, P < .0001), and a negative correlation with MARS-5 (mTurk r = −0.450, P < .0001; COPA r = −0.260, P < .0001). MPRAQ did not correlate with BMQ-Specific Necessity or BMQ-General Benefit. Correlation between MPRAQ baseline and 2-week follow-up scores confirmed test-retest reliability (r = 0.745, P < .0001; n = 52). Conclusion:MPRAQ is a reliable and valid self-report measure of practical adherence barriers.The authors confirm that the PI for this paper is Rob Horne and that he had direct clinical responsibility for patients.