Table 2. Methodological, demographic and clinical characteristics of included studies Participants (N) Age design Outcomes assessed Assessments Significant results Gray IBD n=79 (UC 13-17 y Medication adherence, barriers to MAM Reported adherence: 8.6/10 for 6-MP/AZA and/or 5-ASA et al (2012)7 20%, CD 80%) mean adherence, relationship with CBCL-YSR (adolescent and parent report together) no control group age anxiety/ depressive symptoms Barriers: just forget 84.8%, was not home 43%, interferes 15.5 y with activity 34.2% Other: The presence of anxiety/depressive symptoms intensified the negative impact of barriers to adherence on adolescent’s adherence. A significant correlation was found between disease severity and patient rated adherence and adherence barriers Gumidyala IBD n=50 (UC 11-18 y Cross-sectional Medication adherence MEMS Pill count adherence: 70% for 6-MP/AZA (80% cutoff) 14%, CD 86%) mean et al (2014)8 no control group age 15 y Greenley IBD n=64 (UC 11-18 y Cross-sectional Medication adherence, barriers to Medication Adherence Reported adherence: 65% of adolescents and 66% of 18%, CD 82%) mean adherence Questionnaire mothers reported 100% adherence for all medication and et al (2010)9 no control group age supplements (5-point scale 0=never 4=always adherent) 15.1 y Barriers: lack of time 33%, feeling well 16%, side effects 14%, misbelief 14% Adolescents with >1 daily medication administration and multiple medications reported more adherence barriers, individuals with imperfect adherence on maternal report had significantly more barriers Greenley IBD n= 51 (CD 11-18 y Prospective cohort Medication adherence, role of MAM Reported adherence: median adherence rate of 95.9% for et al (2012)10 86%) no control mean assessment youth and maternal involvement IBD-FRQ 6-MP/AZA group age MEMS Pill adherence: median adherence rate of 92.6%, 28% 14.7 y of the sample having adherence below 80% for 6-MP/AZA Other: High levels of adolescent involvement in their medication regime is associated with better adherence
Table 2. Methodological, demographic and clinical characteristics of included studies Participants (N) Age design Outcomes assessed Assessments Significant results Gray et al (2012)7 IBD n=79 (UC 20%, CD 80%) no control group 13-17 y mean age 15.5 y Medication adherence, barriers to adherence, relationship with anxiety/ depressive symptoms MAM CBCL-YSR Reported adherence: 8.6/10 for 6-MP/AZA and/or 5-ASA (adolescent and parent report together) Barriers: just forget 84.8%, was not home 43%, interferes with activity 34.2% Other: The presence of anxiety/depressive symptoms intensified the negative impact of barriers to adherence on adolescent’s adherence. A significant correlation was found between disease severity and patient rated adherence and adherence barriers Gumidyala et al (2014)8 IBD n=50 (UC 14%, CD 86%) no control group 11-18 y mean age 15 y Cross-sectional Medication adherence MEMS Pill count adherence: 70% for 6-MP/AZA (80% cutoff) Greenley et al (2010)9 IBD n=64 (UC 18%, CD 82%) no control group 11-18 y mean age 15.1 y Cross-sectional Medication adherence, barriers to adherence Medication Adherence Questionnaire Reported adherence: 65% of adolescents and 66% of mothers reported 100% adherence for all medication and supplements (5-point scale 0=never 4=always adherent) Barriers: lack of time 33%, feeling well 16%, side effects 14%, misbelief 14% Adolescents with >1 daily medication administration and multiple medications reported more adherence barriers, individuals with imperfect adherence on maternal report had significantly more barriers Greenley et al (2012)10 IBD n= 51 (CD 86%) no control group 11-18 y mean age 14.7 y Prospective cohort assessment Medication adherence, role of youth and maternal involvement MAM IBD-FRQ MEMS Reported adherence: median adherence rate of 95.9% for 6-MP/AZA Pill adherence: median adherence rate of 92.6%, 28% of the sample having adherence below 80% for 6-MP/AZA Other: High levels of adolescent involvement in their medication regime is associated with better adherence
MPG_2015_07_21_SPEKHORST_JPGN-15-384_SDC1.docx