Dataset Information

The effect of motivational interviewing on medication adherence and hospitalization rates in nonadherent patients with multi-episode schizophrenia.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Medication nonadherence in patients with schizophrenia presents a serious clinical problem. Research on interventions incorporating motivational interviewing (MI) to improve adherence have shown mixed results.

Aims

Primary aim is to determine the effectiveness of a MI intervention on adherence and hospitalization rates in patients, with multi-episode schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, who have experienced a psychotic relapse following medication nonadherence. Secondary aim is to evaluate whether MI is more effective in specific subgroups.

Methods

We performed a randomized controlled study including 114 patients who experienced a psychotic relapse due to medication nonadherence in the past year. Participants received an adapted form of MI or an active control intervention, health education (HE). Both interventions consisted of 5-8 sessions, which patients received in adjunction to the care as usual. Patients were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 12 months follow-up.

Results

Our results show that MI did not improve medication adherence in previously nonadherent patients who experienced a psychotic relapse. Neither were there significant differences in hospitalization rates at follow-up between MI and HE (27% vs 40%, P = .187). However, MI resulted in reduced hospitalization rates for female patients (9% vs 63%, P = .041), non-cannabis users (20% vs 53%, P = .041), younger patients (14% vs 50%, P = .012), and patients with shorter illness duration (14% vs 42%, P = .040).

Conclusions

Targeted use of MI may be of benefit for improving medication adherence in certain groups of patients, although this needs further examination.

SUBMITTER: Barkhof E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3796095 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Non-adherence to antipsychotic medication is commonly found in schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, thus forming a major obstacle to long-term maintenance treatment and contributing to high relapse rates. With limited evidence on the success of interventions in enhancing medication adherence, this controlled trial was designed to test and evaluate the effectiveness of an adherence therapy (AT) for outpatients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, based on a motivational interviewing approach over a six-month follow-up period.A single-blind, randomized controlled trial with a repeated-measures, two parallel groups design was conducted in a random sample of 114 participants with schizophrenia spectrum disorders in one community psychiatric nursing service. After pre-test, the participants were randomly assigned to either an eight-session course of AT plus usual care or usual psychiatric care (n = 57 per group). The main outcomes, including medication adherence, symptom severity, insight into treatment, hospitalization rate, and functioning, were measured at baseline and immediately and six months post-intervention.A total of 110 participants completed this trial and thus the attrition rate was 3.5%. Results of repeated-measures analysis of variance followed by Helmert's contrasts test indicated that the AT participants reported significantly greater improvements in their insight into illness and/or treatment, psychosocial functioning, symptom severity, number of re-hospitalizations, and medication adherence (F = 5.01 to 7.45, P = 0.007 to 0.030) over six months follow-up, when compared with usual care.Motivational interviewing-based AT for people with schizophrenia can be effective to reduce symptom severity and re-hospitalizations, and improve medication adherence, functioning, and insight into illness and/or treatment over a medium term (six months) period of follow-up. Further study on the effects of AT in people with psychotic disorders in terms of diverse sociodemographic and illness characteristics, and a longer term (for example, over 12 months) follow-up period is recommended.The trial was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT01780116) on 6 July 2014.

Project description:BackgroundTrials studying Motivational Interviewing (MI) to improve medication adherence in patients with schizophrenia showed mixed results. Moreover, it is unknown which active MI-ingredients are associated with mechanisms of change in patients with schizophrenia. To enhance the effect of MI for patients with schizophrenia, we studied MI's active ingredients and its working mechanisms.MethodsFirst, based on MI literature, we developed a model of potential active ingredients and mechanisms of change of MI in patients with schizophrenia. We used this model in a qualitative multiple case study to analyze the application of the active ingredients and the occurrence of mechanisms of change. We studied the cases of fourteen patients with schizophrenia who participated in a study on the effect of MI on medication adherence. Second, we used the Generalized Sequential Querier (GSEQ 5.1) to perform a sequential analysis of the MI-conversations aiming to assess the transitional probabilities between therapist use of MI-techniques and subsequent patient reactions in terms of change talk and sustain talk.ResultsWe found the therapist factor "a trusting relationship and empathy" important to enable sufficient depth in the conversation to allow for the opportunity of triggering mechanisms of change. The most important conversational techniques we observed that shape the hypothesized active ingredients are reflections and questions addressing medication adherent behavior or intentions, which approximately 70% of the time was followed by "patient change talk". Surprisingly, sequential MI-consistent therapist behavior like "affirmation" and "emphasizing control" was only about 6% of the time followed by patient change talk. If the active ingredients were embedded in more comprehensive MI-strategies they had more impact on the mechanisms of change.ConclusionsMechanisms of change mostly occurred after an interaction of active ingredients contributed by both therapist and patient. Our model of active ingredients and mechanisms of change enabled us to see "MI at work" in the MI-sessions under study, and this model may help practitioners to shape their MI-strategies to a potentially more effective MI.

Project description:Background and purposeAdherence to medication is often suboptimal after stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA), which increases the risk of recurrent stroke and death. Complex interventions and motivational interviewing (MI) have been proven effective in other areas of medicine. The objective of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention including MI in improving medication adherence for secondary stroke prevention.MethodsIn this randomized controlled trial, TIA and stroke patients receiving a pharmacist intervention in a hospital setting were compared with patients receiving usual care. The intervention consisted of a focused medication review, an MI-approached consultation and 3 follow-up telephone calls and lasted for 6 months. The primary outcome was a composite medication possession ratio (MPR) for antiplatelets, anticoagulants and statins in the year after hospitalization, assessed by analyzing pharmacy records and reported as both a continuous rate and a binary outcome. Secondary outcomes included composite MPRs at 3, 6 and 9 months as well as adherence and persistence to specific thrombopreventive medications at 12 months. Clinical outcomes included a combined end point of cardiovascular death, stroke or acute myocardial infarction. Patient satisfaction with the service was assessed for the intervention patients.ResultsThe analyses included 102 intervention patients and 101 controls. At 12 months, the median MPRs (IQR) were 0.95 (0.77-1) in the intervention group and 0.91 (0.83-0.99) in the control group, and 28 and 21% of the patients, respectively, were nonadherent (MPR <0.80; risk difference: 7%; 95% CI: -5 to 19%). In both groups, the median MPR decreased over time. From 3 to 12 months, the MPR fell by 5% (p < 0.05) in the intervention group and by 9% (p < 0.05) in the control group, but between the groups, comparisons showed no statistically significant difference. No significant differences were found for adherence and persistence to specific thrombopreventive agents or for the clinical outcome. The intervention patients were satisfied with the service; about half of them reported increased knowledge about medication, and one third reported increased confidence with medication use. Pharmacists identified drug-related problems in one third of the patients.ConclusionsA multifaceted pharmacist intervention including MI did not improve adherence or persistence to secondary stroke prevention therapy and had no impact on clinical outcomes. However, due to the high adherence rates, only little room for improvement existed. Future studies should focus on patients at high risk of nonadherence and include outcomes more sensitive to the impact of behavioral interventions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Long-term treatment with antipsychotic medications in early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders is common, but both short and long-term effects on the illness are unclear. There have been numerous suggestions that people with early episodes of schizophrenia appear to respond differently than those with multiple prior episodes. The number of episodes may moderate response to drug treatment. OBJECTIVES:To assess the effects of antipsychotic medication treatment on people with early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders. SEARCH STRATEGY:We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group register (July 2007) as well as references of included studies. We contacted authors of studies for further data. SELECTION CRITERIA:Studies with a majority of first and second episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders comparing initial antipsychotic medication treatment with placebo, milieu, or psychosocial treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Working independently, we critically appraised records from 681studies, of which five studies met inclusion criteria. John Rathbone from the Schizophrenia Group supported us with the data extraction. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) where possible. For continuous data, we calculated mean difference (MD). We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS:Five studies with a combined N = 998 met inclusion criteria. Four studies (N = 724) provided leaving the study early data and results suggested that individuals treated with a typical antipsychotic medication are less likely to leave the study early than those treated with placebo (Chlorpromazine: 3 RCTs N = 353, RR 0.4 CI 0.3 to 0.5, NNT 3.2, Fluphenaxine: 1 RCT N = 240, RR 0.5 CI 0.3 to 0.8, NNT 5; Thioridazine: 1 RCT N = 236, RR 0.44 CI 0.3 to 0.7, NNT 4.3, Trifulperazine: 1 RCT N = 94, RR 0.96 CI 0.3 to 3.6). Two studies (Cole 1964; May 1976) contributed data to assessment of side effects and present a general pattern of more frequent side effects among individuals treated with typical antipsychotic medications compared to placebo. Rappaport 1978 suggested a higher rehospitalisation rate for those receiving chlorpromazine compared to placebo (N = 80, RR 2.29 CI 1.3 to 4.0, NNH 2.9). However, a higher attrition in the placebo group is likely to have introduced a survivor bias into this comparison, as this difference becomes non-significant in a sensitivity analysis on intent-to-treat participants (N = 127, RR 1.69 CI 0.9 to 3.0). One study (May 1976) contributes data to a comparison of trifluoperazine to psychotherapy on long-term health in favour of the trifluoperazine group (N = 92, MD 5.8 CI 1.6 to 0.0); however, data from this study are also likely to contain biases due to selection and attrition. One study (Mosher 1995) contributes data to a comparison of typical antipsychotic medication to psychosocial treatment on six-week outcome measures of global psychopathology (N = 89, MD 0.01 CI -0.6 to 0.6) and global improvement (N = 89, MD -0.03 CI -0.5 to 0.4), indicating no between-group differences. On the whole, there is very little useable data in the few studies meeting inclusion criteria. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:With only a few studies meeting inclusion criteria, and with limited useable data in these studies, it is not possible to arrive at definitive conclusions. The preliminary pattern of evidence suggests that people with early episode schizophrenia treated with typical antipsychotic medications are less likely to leave the study early, but more likely to experience medication-related side effects. Data are too sparse to assess the effects of antipsychotic medication on outcomes in early episode schizophrenia.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Preventive treatment goals for blood pressure and cholesterol levels continue to be unmet for many coronary patients. The effect of drug treatment depends on both its appropriateness and the patients' adherence to the treatment regimen. There is a need for adherence interventions that have a measurable effect on clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to evaluate the effects on treatment goals of an intervention designed to improve patient adherence and treatment quality in secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. A protocol for the prespecified process evaluation of the trial is published separately. METHODS:The Motivational Interviewing and Medication Review in Coronary heart disease (MIMeRiC) trial is a prospective, randomized, outcomes-blinded trial designed to compare individualized follow-up by a clinical pharmacist using motivational interviewing (MI) and medication review with standard follow-up. Patients were randomized to 2 groups after stratification according to their beliefs about medicines. After standard follow-up at the cardiology clinic, patients in the intervention group are seen individually by a clinical pharmacist 2 to 5 times as required over 7 months, at the clinic. The pharmacist reviews each patient's medication and uses MI to manage any problems with prescribing and adherence. The primary study outcome is the proportion of patients who have reached the treatment goal for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 12 months after discharge. Secondary outcomes are the effects on patient adherence, systolic blood pressure, disease-specific quality of life, and health care use. RESULTS:The protocol for this study was approved by the Regional Ethics Committee, Linköping, in 2013. Enrollment started in October 2013 and ended in December 2016 when 417 patients had been included. Follow-up data collection will conclude in March 2018. Publication of the primary and secondary outcome results from the MIMeRiC trial is anticipated in 2019. CONCLUSIONS:The MIMeRiC trial will assess the effectiveness of an intervention involving medication reviews and individualized support. The results will inform the continued development of support for this large group of patients who use preventive medicines for lifelong treatment. The design of this adherence intervention is based on a theoretical framework and is the first trial of an intervention that uses beliefs about medicines to individualize the intervention protocol. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02102503; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02102503 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6x7iUDohy).