Background:Burden of treatment refers to the workload of health care as well as its impact on patient functioning and well-being. We set out to build a conceptual framework of issues descriptive of burden of treatment from the perspective of the complex patient, as a first step in the development of a new patient-reported measure.Methods:We conducted semistructured interviews with patients seeking medication therapy management services at a large, academic medical center. All patients had a complex regimen of self-care (including polypharmacy), and were coping with one or more chronic health conditions. We used framework analysis to identify and code themes and subthemes. A conceptual framework of burden of treatment was outlined from emergent themes and subthemes.Results:Thirty-two patients (20 female, 12 male, age 26–85 years) were interviewed. Three broad themes of burden of treatment emerged including: the work patients must do to care for their health; problem-focused strategies and tools to facilitate the work of self-care; and factors that exacerbate the burden felt. The latter theme encompasses six subthemes including challenges with taking medication, emotional problems with others, role and activity limitations, financial challenges, confusion about medical information, and health care delivery obstacles.Conclusion:We identified several key domains and issues of burden of treatment amenable to future measurement and organized them into a conceptual framework. Further development work on this conceptual framework will inform the derivation of a patient-reported measure of burden of treatment.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a new comprehensive patient-reported measure of treatment burden – the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-Management (PETS). Methods A conceptual framework was used to derive the PETS with items reviewed and cognitively tested with patients. A survey battery, including a pilot version of the PETS, was mailed to 838 multi-morbid patients from two healthcare institutions for validation. Results A total of 332 multi-morbid patients returned completed surveys. Diagnostics supported deletion and consolidation of some items and domains. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a domain model for scaling comprised of 9 factors: medical information, medications, medical appointments, monitoring health, interpersonal challenges, medical/healthcare expenses, difficulty with healthcare services, role/social activity limitations, and physical/mental exhaustion. Scales showed good internal consistency (alpha range: 0.79 – 0.95). Higher PETS scores, indicative of greater treatment burden, were correlated with more distress, less satisfaction with medications, lower self-efficacy, worse physical and mental health, and lower convenience of healthcare (Ps<.001). Patients with lower health literacy, less adherence to medications, and more financial difficulties reported higher PETS scores (Ps<.01). Conclusion A comprehensive patient-reported measure of treatment burden can help to better characterize the impact of treatment and self-management burden on patient well-being and guide care toward minimally disruptive medicine.

The success of vaccination programs is contingent upon irrefutable scientific safety data combined with high rates of public acceptance and population coverage. Vaccine hesitancy, characterized by lack of confidence in vaccination and/or complacency about vaccination that may lead to delay or refusal to vaccinate despite the availability of services, threatens to undermine the success of COVID-19 vaccination programs. The rapid pace of vaccine development, misinformation in popular and social media, the polarized sociopolitical environment, and the inherent complexities of large-scale vaccination efforts may undermine vaccination confidence and increase complacency about COVID-19 vaccination. While the experience of recent lethal surges of COVID-19 infections have underscored the value of COVID-19 vaccines, ensuring population uptake of COVID-19 vaccination will require application of multi-level, evidence-based strategies to influence behavior change and address vaccine hesitancy. Recent survey research evaluating public attitudes in the U.S. toward the COVID-19 vaccine reveals substantial vaccine hesitancy. Building upon efforts at the policy and community level to ensure population access to COVID-19 vaccination, a strong healthcare system response is critical to address vaccine hesitancy. Drawing on the evidence base in social, behavioral, communication, and implementation science, we review, summarize and encourage use of interpersonal, individual-level, and organizational interventions within clinical organizations to address this critical gap and improve population adoption of COVID-19 vaccination.