Refill Adherence Measures and Its Association with Economic, Clinical, and Humanistic Outcomes Among Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Although refill adherence measures (RAMs) are widely reviewed on their use among adult patients, existing reviews on adherence among children have only focused on self-report measures and electronic monitoring. Hence, this systematic review aims to examine the use of RAMs and their association with economic, clinical, and humanistic outcomes (ECHO) among pediatric patients. A literature search was conducted in Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Studies published in English involving subjects aged ≤18 years were included if RAMs were analyzed with ECHO. Of the 35 included studies, the majority (n = 33) were conducted in high-income countries. Asthma was the most common condition (n = 9) studied. Overall, 60.6% of 33 clinical outcomes reported among 22 studies was positive (improved clinical outcomes with improved adherence), while 21.9% of 32 economic outcomes reported among 16 studies was positive (reduced healthcare utilization or cost outcomes with improved adherence). Only four studies evaluated the relationship of adherence with 11 humanistic outcomes, where the majority (72.7%) were considered unclear. RAMs are associated with ECHO and can be considered for use in the pediatric population. Future studies could explore the use of RAMs in low-income countries, and the association of RAMs with quality of life.

Clinical, economic and humanistic outcomes of medication therapy management services: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…According to the model, economic, clinical and humanistic outcomes are used to comprehensively analyze the efficacy of medical intervention. Although several studies comprehensively evaluated patient’s burden and medical interventions using the ECHO model, such as refill adherence measures and STOPP/START criteria ( Reeder et al, 2000 ; Jeremy et al, 2011 ; Hill-Taylor et al, 2013 ; Zhao et al, 2019 ; Chua et al, 2020 ), few studies evaluated the efficacy of MTM services with full ECHO model. Despite descriptive studies demonstrating that MTM services improved patients’ clinical conditions, quality of life and potentially reduced healthcare disparities ( Bunting and Cranor, 2006 ; Shrestha et al, 2022 ), studies analyzed the three parts of ECHO model in one assessment was little ( Singhal et al, 1999 ; Cheng et al, 2013 ; Johnson et al, 2018 ).…”