Assessing adherence to dermatology treatments: a review of self-report and electronic measures

Greenlaw, Sheila M.; Yentzer, Brad A.; O’Neill, Jenna L.; Balkrishnan, Rajesh; Feldman, Steven R.

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0846.2010.00431.x

Cited by 41 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…58 Measuring adherence is challenging because traditional methods of patient self-report tend to overestimate adherence. 52,59 Electronic monitoring devices can improve objective adherence assessment, but not all topical medications are compatible for use with electronically monitored containers, and these containers have not been widely studied in dermatology. 52,59 Electronically monitored adherence for 3 different skin conditions demonstrated that adherence was highest on days near the time of a scheduled office visit.…”

Section: Adherence To Treatment Regimensmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…52,59 Electronic monitoring devices can improve objective adherence assessment, but not all topical medications are compatible for use with electronically monitored containers, and these containers have not been widely studied in dermatology. 52,59 Electronically monitored adherence for 3 different skin conditions demonstrated that adherence was highest on days near the time of a scheduled office visit. 60 This suggested that when patients knew they would see their doctor soon, they were significantly more likely to use their medicine as directed.…”

Section: Adherence To Treatment Regimensmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Current issues in the management of actinic keratosis

Ceilley

Jorizzo

2013

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Adherence To Treatment Regimensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Adherence To Treatment Regimensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current issues in the management of actinic keratosis

Ceilley

Jorizzo

2013

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Count-based measures ask respondents to report the number of medication doses missed or taken in a certain interval, whereas estimation measures ask respondents to characterize their overall degree of regimen execution in terms of ratings or visual analog scales. The number of items on self-report adherence measures varies from single-item questions to more elaborate multi-item scales [1,5,45]. The number of items often reflects the degree to which the measure is seeking to capture a variety of adherence-related factors, such as reasons for nonadherence.…”

Section: Available Self-report Adherence Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-report measures of medication adherence behavior: recommendations on optimal use

Stirratt

Dunbar‐Jacob

Crane

et al. 2015

Behav. Med. Pract. Policy Res.

613

528

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Medication adherence plays an important role in optimizing the outcomes of many treatment and preventive regimens in chronic illness. Self-report is the most common method for assessing adherence behavior in research and clinical care, but there are questions about its validity and precision. The NIH Adherence Network assembled a panel of adherence research experts working across various chronic illnesses to review selfreport medication adherence measures and research on their validity. Self-report medication adherence measures vary substantially in their question phrasing, recall periods, and response items. Self-reports tend to overestimate adherence behavior compared with other assessment methods and generally have high specificity but low sensitivity. Most evidence indicates that self-report adherence measures show moderate correspondence to other adherence measures and can significantly predict clinical outcomes. The quality of self-report adherence measures may be enhanced through efforts to use validated scales, assess the proper construct, improve estimation, facilitate recall, reduce social desirability bias, and employ technologic delivery. Self-report medication adherence measures can provide actionable information despite their limitations. They are preferred when speed, efficiency, and low-cost measures are required, as is often the case in clinical care. KeywordsAdherence, Compliance, Self-management, Medication, Self-report Valid measurement of medication adherence plays a crucial role in healthcare and health research. When a patient is not benefiting from a medication regimen, clinicians need sound adherence information to determine whether the medication is ineffective or not being taken as prescribed. Assessing medication adherence during routine clinical care can further ensure that individuals in need of adherence support interventions receive them, ideally before deleterious outcomes occur. In the context of clinical research, proper interpretation of proof-of-concept trials testing new pharmacologic regimens requires valid adherence data, because any null findings may stem from poor adherence rather than a lack of drug efficacy. Research designed to understand and promote medication adherence also requires precise methods of adherence assessment.Among many approaches to assessing medication adherence, patient self-report measures remain the most common method [1][2][3][4][5][6]. These measures are defined by asking respondents to characterize their medication adherence behavior. Self-report measures of medication adherence range from simple singleitem questions regarding missed doses to complex multi-item assessments that incorporate reasons for nonadherence [7]. The widespread use of self-report adherence measures in clinical care and research reflects their low cost and ease of implementation across a large variety of medication regimens.There are two primary challenges related to selfreport measures of medication adherence. ImplicationsPractice: Routine assessment of medication...

show abstract

“…Because these were healthy volunteers without any known deficits of visual or motor impairment, they were assumed capable of applying the ointment correctly at home, simulating the normal situation when dermatology patients apply topical therapies. We did not use the finger-tip principle of topical application and we did not include electronic surveillance such as medication event monitoring systems (MEMS), which may be difficult to adapt to topical formulations as the system was originally designed for oral products (9,10). In fact, the quantity of study medicine each day would likely have been shown to vary even more if we had used MEMS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%