Understanding Patient Preferences in Medication Nonadherence: A Review of Stated Preference Data.

Tracey-Lea Laba, Beverley Essue, Merel Kimman, Stephen Jan
Author Information
  1. Tracey-Lea Laba: The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2010, Australia. thar7910@uni.sydney.edu.au.
  2. Beverley Essue: The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2010, Australia.
  3. Merel Kimman: The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2010, Australia.
  4. Stephen Jan: The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2010, Australia.

Abstract

Nonadherence is a global problem undermining the cost-effectiveness of evidence-based medications. Aligning treatment choices with patient preferences may promote adherent behaviour: eliciting patient treatment preferences may help resolve the problem of nonadherence. As there is no reliable measure of nonadherent behaviour that can be used to derive preferences, stated-preference techniques offer a robust alternative. To understand patient preferences in medication nonadherence, we systematically appraised full-text English studies (from database inception to 24 February 2014) involving participants evaluating hypothetical scenarios to elicit preferences as an explicit means to understand medication nonadherence. Study characteristics (e.g. setting, disease, stated-preference method), attribute type and influence on choice were extracted. Seventeen full-text articles (4,456 patients) were included in the review, which reports stated-preference elicitation studies across a wide range of chronic and acute conditions. All studies were conducted in high-income settings. The influence of drug-related factors was predominant in patients' preferences for treatment. Patients preferred efficacious over safe medications except when considering the duration of therapy, but dosing and cost appeared more important when contemplating adherence. Patient characteristics, particularly medication experience, significantly influenced preferences. A disparity between stated preferences for treatment and adherence was reported. When using stated-preference techniques to understand nonadherence, this manuscript highlights that there is much room for methodological development. Studies outside of high-income settings are needed, particularly in relation to chronic diseases, for which nonadherence poses a substantial economic burden to health systems and patients. To inform the problem of sustaining adherence, prospective research is needed to understand how preferences change with time. The usefulness of stated-preference techniques to inform policy and practice requires a better understanding of how stated preferences relate to actual adherence behaviour.

References

  1. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Jun 14;12:98 [PMID: 22510235]
  2. Patient. 2010 Dec 1;3(4):249-56 [PMID: 22273432]
  3. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(12):1243-55 [PMID: 16336018]
  4. Adv Ther. 2005 Jul-Aug;22(4):313-56 [PMID: 16418141]
  5. Med Care. 2007 Jun;45(6):545-52 [PMID: 17515782]
  6. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2004 Oct;93(4):345-50 [PMID: 15521370]
  7. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2011;5:307-14 [PMID: 21792302]
  8. Am Heart J. 2011 Sep;162(3):412-24 [PMID: 21884856]
  9. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013 May 06;14:160 [PMID: 23647688]
  10. BMC Fam Pract. 2012 Jun 20;13:61 [PMID: 22715853]
  11. J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Dec;26(12):1479-91 [PMID: 21858602]
  12. BMJ Open. 2011 Jan 1;1(2):e000372 [PMID: 22080542]
  13. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Feb;27(2):173-8 [PMID: 21971600]
  14. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(8):661-77 [PMID: 18620460]
  15. J Clin Nurs. 2007 Apr;16(4):698-706 [PMID: 17402951]
  16. J Med Econ. 2012;15(5):897-905 [PMID: 22548677]
  17. Health Econ. 2007 Jul;16(7):703-17 [PMID: 17238221]
  18. Osteoporos Int. 2008 Jul;19(7):1029-37 [PMID: 18193329]
  19. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 Aug;31(8):1836-46 [PMID: 22869663]
  20. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1999 Summer;15(3):443-57 [PMID: 10874373]
  21. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2011 Dec;13(12):898-909 [PMID: 22142349]
  22. Value Health. 2011 Jun;14(4):403-13 [PMID: 21669364]
  23. N Engl J Med. 2005 Aug 4;353(5):487-97 [PMID: 16079372]
  24. J Viral Hepat. 2011 Sep;18(9):619-27 [PMID: 20579276]
  25. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011 Mar;63(3):342-50 [PMID: 21120967]
  26. JAMA. 2013 Sep 4;310(9):918-29 [PMID: 24002278]
  27. Med J Aust. 2008 Feb 18;188(4):224-7 [PMID: 18279129]
  28. Psychosom Med. 2010 Oct;72(8):810-6 [PMID: 20716711]
  29. Arch Dermatol. 2011 Nov;147(11):1285-94 [PMID: 22106115]
  30. J Med Econ. 2011;14(5):594-608 [PMID: 21732903]
  31. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Apr 16;(2):CD000011 [PMID: 18425859]
  32. Med Decis Making. 2008 Mar-Apr;28(2):233-42 [PMID: 18349430]
  33. J Card Fail. 2008 Sep;14(7):603-14 [PMID: 18722327]
  34. AIDS Care. 2009 Jun;21(6):785-95 [PMID: 19806492]
  35. Health Econ Policy Law. 2009 Oct;4(Pt 4):527-46 [PMID: 19715635]
  36. J Manag Care Pharm. 2009 Nov-Dec;15(9):728-40 [PMID: 19954264]
  37. Value Health. 2012 Jan-Feb;15(1 Suppl):S9-14 [PMID: 22265074]
  38. AIDS Behav. 2011 Nov;15(8):1612-22 [PMID: 21850442]
  39. Med Care. 2002 Sep;40(9):794-811 [PMID: 12218770]
  40. Int J Cardiol. 2010 Oct 29;144(3):379-82 [PMID: 19446896]
  41. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2011 Apr;36(2):179-86 [PMID: 21366647]
  42. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2013 Sep 18;7:937-49 [PMID: 24086104]
  43. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012 Sep;67(3):363-72 [PMID: 22015150]
  44. Can J Cardiol. 2012 Sep-Oct;28(5):567-73 [PMID: 22658124]
  45. AIDS Care. 2010 Aug;22(8):979-87 [PMID: 20552469]
  46. Br J Dermatol. 2006 Mar;154(3):524-32 [PMID: 16445786]
  47. Diabet Med. 2009 Apr;26(4):416-24 [PMID: 19388973]
  48. Patient. 2012;5(1):33-44 [PMID: 22077619]
  49. Med Care. 2004 Mar;42(3):200-9 [PMID: 15076819]
  50. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2009 Jan;14(1):58-61 [PMID: 19103918]
  51. Soc Sci Med. 2005 Jul;61(1):133-55 [PMID: 15847968]
  52. Respirology. 2007 Jan;12(1):127-36 [PMID: 17207038]

MeSH Term

Adult
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Databases, Bibliographic
Evidence-Based Medicine
Female
Humans
Male
Medication Adherence
Middle Aged
Patient Preference

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0preferencesnonadherencestated-preferencetreatmentunderstandadherenceproblempatienttechniquesmedicationstudiesmedicationsmaybehaviourfull-textcharacteristicsinfluencepatientschronichigh-incomesettingsPatientparticularlystatedneededinformNonadherenceglobalunderminingcost-effectivenessevidence-basedAligningchoicespromoteadherentbehaviour:elicitinghelpresolvereliablemeasurenonadherentcanusedderiveofferrobustalternativesystematicallyappraisedEnglishdatabaseinception24February2014involvingparticipantsevaluatinghypotheticalscenarioselicitexplicitmeansStudyegsettingdiseasemethodattributetypechoiceextractedSeventeenarticles4456includedreviewreportselicitationacrosswiderangeacuteconditionsconducteddrug-relatedfactorspredominantpatients'PatientspreferredefficacioussafeexceptconsideringdurationtherapydosingcostappearedimportantcontemplatingexperiencesignificantlyinfluenceddisparityreportedusingmanuscripthighlightsmuchroommethodologicaldevelopmentStudiesoutsiderelationdiseasesposessubstantialeconomicburdenhealthsystemssustainingprospectiveresearchchangetimeusefulnesspolicypracticerequiresbetterunderstandingrelateactualUnderstandingPreferencesMedicationNonadherence:ReviewStatedPreferenceData

Similar Articles

Cited By