Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/24014
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Konstantinou, Pinelopi | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kasinopoulos, Orestis | - |
dc.contributor.author | Karashiali, Christiana | - |
dc.contributor.author | Georgiou, Geοrgios | - |
dc.contributor.author | Panayides, Andreas S. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Papageorgiou, Alexia | - |
dc.contributor.author | Wozniak, Greta | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kassianos, Angelos P. | - |
dc.contributor.author | Karekla, Maria | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-02-13T10:29:48Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-02-13T10:29:48Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2021-09-27 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 2021 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 15324796 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/24014 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Background Medication nonadherence of patients with chronic conditions is a complex phenomenon contributing to increased economic burden and decreased quality of life. Intervention development relies on accurately assessing adherence but no “gold standard” method currently exists. Purpose The present scoping review aimed to: (a) review and describe current methods of assessing medication adherence (MA) in patients with chronic conditions with the highest nonadherence rates (asthma, cancer, diabetes, epilepsy, HIV/AIDS, hypertension), (b) outline and compare the evidence on the quality indicators between assessment methods (e.g., sensitivity), and (c) provide evidence-based recommendations. Methods PubMed, PsycINFO and Scopus databases were screened, resulting in 62,592 studies of which 71 met criteria and were included. Results Twenty-seven self-report and 10 nonself-report measures were identified. The Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) was found to be the most accurate self-report, whereas electronic monitoring devices such as Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS) corresponded to the most accurate nonself-report. Higher MA rates were reported when assessed using self-reports compared to nonself-reports, except from pill counts. Conclusions Professionals are advised to use a combination of self-report (like MARS-5) and nonself-report measures (like MEMS) as these were found to be the most accurate and reliable measures. This is the first review examining self and nonself-report methods for MA, across chronic conditions with the highest nonadherence rates and provides evidence-based recommendations. It highlights that MA assessment methods are understudied in certain conditions, like epilepsy. Before selecting a MA measure, professionals are advised to inspect its quality indicators. Feasibility of measures should be explored in future studies as there is presently a lack of evidence. | en_US |
dc.format | en_US | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Annals of Behavioral Medicine | en_US |
dc.rights | © Oxford University Press | en_US |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject | Medication adherence | en_US |
dc.subject | Chronic conditions | en_US |
dc.subject | Assessment | en_US |
dc.subject | Self-reports | en_US |
dc.subject | Scoping review | en_US |
dc.title | A Scoping Review of Methods Used to Assess Medication Adherence in Patients with Chronic Conditions | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.collaboration | University of Cyprus | en_US |
dc.collaboration | European University Cyprus | en_US |
dc.collaboration | 3AE Health LTD | en_US |
dc.collaboration | University of Nicosia | en_US |
dc.collaboration | University College London | en_US |
dc.subject.category | Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.journals | Subscription | en_US |
dc.country | Cyprus | en_US |
dc.country | United Kingdom | en_US |
dc.subject.field | Medical and Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.publication | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1093/abm/kaab080 | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 34570875 | - |
cut.common.academicyear | 2021-2022 | en_US |
item.openairecristype | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | - |
item.openairetype | article | - |
item.cerifentitytype | Publications | - |
item.grantfulltext | none | - |
item.languageiso639-1 | en | - |
item.fulltext | No Fulltext | - |
crisitem.journal.journalissn | 1532-4796 | - |
crisitem.journal.publisher | Oxford University Press | - |
crisitem.author.dept | Department of Nursing | - |
crisitem.author.faculty | Faculty of Health Sciences | - |
crisitem.author.orcid | 0000-0001-6428-2623 | - |
crisitem.author.parentorg | Faculty of Health Sciences | - |
Appears in Collections: | Άρθρα/Articles |
CORE Recommender
SCOPUSTM
Citations
2
checked on Mar 14, 2024
Page view(s)
266
Last Week
0
0
Last month
10
10
checked on Nov 21, 2024
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License