Search

Objective Medicines acceptability is likely to have a significant impact on older people's adherence and, consequently, treatment effectiveness. The objective was to explore the influence of setting on medicines acceptability in older people. Methods A multi-centre, prospective, cross-sectional, observational study was conducted in one care home and one elderly care hospital ward in London, UK, involving individuals on ≥1 medicine(s) and aged ≥65 years. Data-driven approach was applied using multiple observer-reported outcomes analysis tool to distinguish between positively and negatively accepted medicines. Key findings 263 observer reports from the care home (n = 97) and hospital ward (n = 166) involving 155 distinct medicinal products were assessed. Collectively, medicines appeared better accepted by patients at the hospital. Differences appeared to be driven by variations in solid oral dosage form (SODF) acceptability. Patients with dysphagia poorly accepted medicines in both settings, as expected. SODFs were unexpectedly better accepted in the hospital than in the care home in patients without dysphagia. Conclusions Medicines acceptability was affected by patient's characteristics, dosage form type and setting. Changes in care practices between care home and hospital may affect medicine administration and lead to variations in the ability and willingness of patients and carers to use the product as intended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Our novel tool to standardise the evaluation of medicine acceptability was developed using observational data on medicines use measured in a paediatric population included for this purpose (0-14 years). Using this tool, any medicine may be positioned on a map and assigned to an acceptability profile. The present exploration aimed to verify its statistical reliability. Methods Permutation test has been used to verify the significance of the relationships among measures highlighted by the acceptability map. Bootstrapping has been used to demonstrate the accuracy of the model (map, profiles and scores of acceptability) regardless of variations in the data. Lastly, simulations of enlarged data sets (×2; ×5; ×10) have been built to study the model's consistency. Key findings Permutation test established the significance of the meaningful pattern identified in the data and summarised in the map. Bootstrapping attested the accuracy of the model: high RV coefficients (mean value: 0.930) verified the mapping stability, significant Adjusted Rand Indexes and Jaccard coefficients supported clustering validity (with either two or four profiles), and agreement between acceptability scores demonstrated scoring relevancy. Regarding enlarged data sets, these indicators reflected a very high consistency of the model. Conclusions These results highlighted the reliability of the model that will permit its use to standardise medicine acceptability assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The purpose of this article was to present an original standardized tool assessing the medicine's acceptability whichever their characteristics and the patient features. Methods An acceptability map was built with objective measures from medicine use assessments collected in real-life conditions. Multiple correspondence analysis ( MCA) was used for the mapping process. Hierarchical classification on the principal components ( HCPC) of the MCA was performed for the clustering process corresponding to distinct acceptability profiles. Key findings The results presented here focus on 234 evaluations issued from the paediatric population and gathered in four clusters: 'well-accepted' (50%), 'accepted' (19%), 'poorly accepted' (25%) and 'not accepted' medicines (6%). The first one was characterized by a dose fully taken, in a short time, with a patient's positive reaction; the second by a longer administration time, a neutral reaction and the use of methods to achieve administration (reward, divided dose). Differentiation between the two last clusters was, respectively, originated by a required dose partially taken or not taken. Conclusions The acceptability profile of each medicine can be evaluated with the map position of the related patient's assessments barycentre. This tool should satisfy expectations in terms of methods for appropriate acceptability evaluation and standardized comparison among medicines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]