Assessment of patient and provider attitudes towards therapeutic drug monitoring to improve medication adherence in low-income patients with hypertension: a qualitative study. Issue 11 (27th November 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Schesing, Kevin B; Chia, Ricardo; Elwood, Bryan; Halm, Ethan A; Lee, Simon J Craddock; Lodhi, Hamza; Wu, Bryan; Sharma, Shishir; Smith, Scott A; Jarrett, Robin B; Das, Sandeep R; Vongpatanasin, Wanpen
• Is Part Of: BMJ open. Volume 10:Issue 11(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-11-27
• Subjects: hypertension -- internal medicine -- cardiology -- qualitative research; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; 610.72
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039940
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-6055

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: Previous studies have implicated therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), by measuring serum or urine drug levels, as a highly reliable technique for detecting medication non-adherence but the attitudes of patients and physicians toward TDM have not been evaluated previously. Accordingly, we solicited input from patients with uncontrolled hypertension and their physicians about their views on TDM. Design: Prospective analysis of responses to a set of questions during semistructured interviews. Setting: Outpatient clinics in an integrated health system which provides care for a low-income, uninsured population. Participants: Patients with uncontrolled hypertension with either systolic blood pressure of at least 130 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure of at least 80 mm Hg despite antihypertensive drugs and providers in the general cardiology and internal medicine clinics. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Attitudes towards TDM and the potential impact on physician–patient relationship. Results: We interviewed 11 patients and 10 providers and discussed the findings with 13 community advisory panel (CAP) members. Of the patients interviewed, 91% (10 of 11) and all 10 providers thought TDM was a good idea and should be used regularly to better understand the reasons for poorly controlled hypertension. However, 63% (7 of 11) of patients and 20% of providers expressed reservations that TDM could negatively impact the physician–patient relationship. Despite some concerns, the majority of patients, providers and CAP members believed that if test results are communicated without blaming patients, the potential benefits of TDM in identifying suboptimal adherence and eliciting barriers to adherence outweighed the risks. Conclusion: The idea of TDM is well accepted by patients and their providers. TDM information if delivered in a non-judgmental manner, to encourage an honest conversation between patients and physicians, has the potential to reduce patient–physician communication obstacles and to identify barriers to adherence which, when overcome, can improve health outcomes.