Programmaleider Communicatie in de Gezondheidszorg; bijzonder hoogleraar 'Communicatie in de gezondheidszorg', Radboudumc
Publicatie
Publicatie datum
Talking about barriers to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs: content analysis of audio-recorded routine clinical visits of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
Voshaar, M.J.H., Bemt, B.J. van den, Laar, M.A. van der, Dulmen, S. van, Vriezekolk, J.E. Talking about barriers to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs: content analysis of audio-recorded routine clinical visits of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Patient Preference and Adherence: 2025, 19, p. 777–790.
Purpose
Effective healthcare professional-patient communication is essential for medication adherence. Conversations about patient’s barriers to medication use, for example, could help to enhance adherence and consequently improve treatment outcomes. However, it is unclear whether and how barriers to medication use are discussed during routine rheumatology consultations. The aims of this study were to examine 1) the barriers and facilitators to medication use raised by patients during real-life rheumatology
outpatient consultations, and whether the issue of medication (non)adherence was discussed (communication content); and 2) how rheumatologists responded to the barriers (communication process).
Methods
A total of 134 audio-recordings of real-life outpatient rheumatology consultations were analysed. Barriers and facilitators for the current use of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were identified and categorized using a previously adapted Theoretical Domains Framework. The way rheumatologists responded to the barriers brought up by the patients was analysed using relevant parts of the Roter
Interaction Analysis System.
Results
In 58 of the 134 consultations, at least one barrier or facilitator to current medication use was brought up by the patient; in 31 out of 134 consultations, medication (non)adherence was addressed. Most facilitators were related to the quality of the needles, the use of an injection pen instead of a syringe, dose reduction because of low disease activity and timing of the medication. The majority of barriers were related to experiencing side effects and doubts about efficacy and resistance of (long-term use of) medication. Rheumatologists’ responses to barriers related to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were mostly a combination of instrumental (counselling) and affective (agreement) communication.
Conclusion
Barriers to current disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs’ use raised by patients and discussed during routine rheumatology consultations were primarily related to side effects and concerns about the efficacy and long-term use. Continuous attention of these barriers and tailored responses to patients’ concerns are key to promote better adherence to treatment.
Effective healthcare professional-patient communication is essential for medication adherence. Conversations about patient’s barriers to medication use, for example, could help to enhance adherence and consequently improve treatment outcomes. However, it is unclear whether and how barriers to medication use are discussed during routine rheumatology consultations. The aims of this study were to examine 1) the barriers and facilitators to medication use raised by patients during real-life rheumatology
outpatient consultations, and whether the issue of medication (non)adherence was discussed (communication content); and 2) how rheumatologists responded to the barriers (communication process).
Methods
A total of 134 audio-recordings of real-life outpatient rheumatology consultations were analysed. Barriers and facilitators for the current use of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were identified and categorized using a previously adapted Theoretical Domains Framework. The way rheumatologists responded to the barriers brought up by the patients was analysed using relevant parts of the Roter
Interaction Analysis System.
Results
In 58 of the 134 consultations, at least one barrier or facilitator to current medication use was brought up by the patient; in 31 out of 134 consultations, medication (non)adherence was addressed. Most facilitators were related to the quality of the needles, the use of an injection pen instead of a syringe, dose reduction because of low disease activity and timing of the medication. The majority of barriers were related to experiencing side effects and doubts about efficacy and resistance of (long-term use of) medication. Rheumatologists’ responses to barriers related to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were mostly a combination of instrumental (counselling) and affective (agreement) communication.
Conclusion
Barriers to current disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs’ use raised by patients and discussed during routine rheumatology consultations were primarily related to side effects and concerns about the efficacy and long-term use. Continuous attention of these barriers and tailored responses to patients’ concerns are key to promote better adherence to treatment.
Purpose
Effective healthcare professional-patient communication is essential for medication adherence. Conversations about patient’s barriers to medication use, for example, could help to enhance adherence and consequently improve treatment outcomes. However, it is unclear whether and how barriers to medication use are discussed during routine rheumatology consultations. The aims of this study were to examine 1) the barriers and facilitators to medication use raised by patients during real-life rheumatology
outpatient consultations, and whether the issue of medication (non)adherence was discussed (communication content); and 2) how rheumatologists responded to the barriers (communication process).
Methods
A total of 134 audio-recordings of real-life outpatient rheumatology consultations were analysed. Barriers and facilitators for the current use of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were identified and categorized using a previously adapted Theoretical Domains Framework. The way rheumatologists responded to the barriers brought up by the patients was analysed using relevant parts of the Roter
Interaction Analysis System.
Results
In 58 of the 134 consultations, at least one barrier or facilitator to current medication use was brought up by the patient; in 31 out of 134 consultations, medication (non)adherence was addressed. Most facilitators were related to the quality of the needles, the use of an injection pen instead of a syringe, dose reduction because of low disease activity and timing of the medication. The majority of barriers were related to experiencing side effects and doubts about efficacy and resistance of (long-term use of) medication. Rheumatologists’ responses to barriers related to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were mostly a combination of instrumental (counselling) and affective (agreement) communication.
Conclusion
Barriers to current disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs’ use raised by patients and discussed during routine rheumatology consultations were primarily related to side effects and concerns about the efficacy and long-term use. Continuous attention of these barriers and tailored responses to patients’ concerns are key to promote better adherence to treatment.
Effective healthcare professional-patient communication is essential for medication adherence. Conversations about patient’s barriers to medication use, for example, could help to enhance adherence and consequently improve treatment outcomes. However, it is unclear whether and how barriers to medication use are discussed during routine rheumatology consultations. The aims of this study were to examine 1) the barriers and facilitators to medication use raised by patients during real-life rheumatology
outpatient consultations, and whether the issue of medication (non)adherence was discussed (communication content); and 2) how rheumatologists responded to the barriers (communication process).
Methods
A total of 134 audio-recordings of real-life outpatient rheumatology consultations were analysed. Barriers and facilitators for the current use of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were identified and categorized using a previously adapted Theoretical Domains Framework. The way rheumatologists responded to the barriers brought up by the patients was analysed using relevant parts of the Roter
Interaction Analysis System.
Results
In 58 of the 134 consultations, at least one barrier or facilitator to current medication use was brought up by the patient; in 31 out of 134 consultations, medication (non)adherence was addressed. Most facilitators were related to the quality of the needles, the use of an injection pen instead of a syringe, dose reduction because of low disease activity and timing of the medication. The majority of barriers were related to experiencing side effects and doubts about efficacy and resistance of (long-term use of) medication. Rheumatologists’ responses to barriers related to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs were mostly a combination of instrumental (counselling) and affective (agreement) communication.
Conclusion
Barriers to current disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs’ use raised by patients and discussed during routine rheumatology consultations were primarily related to side effects and concerns about the efficacy and long-term use. Continuous attention of these barriers and tailored responses to patients’ concerns are key to promote better adherence to treatment.
Gegevensverzameling