Multiple Sclerosis and Medication

¶ … Medication of Multiple Sclerosis

This study aimed to calculate the prevalence of adherence to therapy among multiple sclerosis patients in King Khalid University Hospital, in addition to find the relationship between adherence to therapy among multiple sclerosis patients and some important factors.

Studies on adherence to medication of multiple sclerosis provide important data about patient adhering to their medications with respect to the patient medication-taking behavior, factoring in the different demographic characteristics. In turn, this helps future planning on how to make certain that multiple sclerosis patients adhere to medication and treatment advised to them. The demographic characteristics taken into consideration in the case study include age, gender, level of education, employment status, marital status, income level, and residence. The data is analyzed in terms of making a comparison between low adherence and high adherence to medication by using these particular demographic characteristics as differentiators (Koskderelioglu et al., 2015).

The results of this study indicated no significant differences between low and high adherence according to age groups, gender, educational levels, job, marital status, income, and place of residence among patients in King Khalid University Hospital in Saudi Arabia. To begin with, there is low significant difference between low adherence and high adherence with respect to age groups. This finding may be explained by the fact that the average age of those studied is 32 years. What is more, all the patients are above the age of 16 years, which implies that they are old enough to be ignorant or not to be interested in adhering to their medication. This observation is consistent with that appearing in literature, which indicates that there is no correlation between adherence to medication and the age of both male and female patients (Jin et al., 2008). The results of this study indicated no significant differences between low and high adherence according to gender. This can be explained by the fact that literature indicates that there is no correlation. However, a key aspect to take into consideration is that the population sample includes individuals from Saudi Arabia, 70% of which are female. In particular, it is imperative to consider the environs, together with the circumstance in which the Arab women live. Sensibly, having to live under the war and the unstable situation might cause/force the women patients to discontinue their treatment and weaken the adherence to medication because of the low desire in living.

The results also indicate no significant differences between low and high adherence with respect to educational levels. This finding may be explained by the fact that only 12 patients out of the 100 participants have yet to attain high school education. However, in general, this finding is not necessarily consistent with the literature that indicates adherence to medication and treatment to be lower in the groups and participants in even those with higher levels of education. However, it is imperative to note that literature states that the level education of the patient is not a strong indicator or predictor. The study also indicates no significant correlation between low and high adherence with respect to marital status. In particular, 44% of the patients were single, 48% of them were married, while the remaining 8% were divorced and widowed. These results do not seem to agree with the observations that appear in literature, which suggests that unmarried individuals stand a higher risk for treatment and medication nonadherence compared to individuals who are married (Wu et al., 2012).

Results of the study also indicate no significant differences between low and high adherence with respect to the employment status of the participating patients. In this case, majority of the patients were unemployed forming 61%, 33% of them employed, and the remaining patients retired. This result does not agree with that in the literature. This is largely because literature indicates that there is a positive correlation between employment and adherence to medication. It is believed that individuals with employment are educated and therefore have knowledge of the significance of adhering to medication recommended; secondly, employment is linked to income and therefore patients are able to afford and purchase the medication recommended as and when needed (Katsarava et al., 2015).

Further, there is an indication of no significant difference between low and high adherence with respect to the level of income of the participants. However, this particular outcome is not similar to literature that indicates that factors of level of income, together with knowledge correlated with adherence significantly. In particular, according to Shehadeh-Sheeny et al. (2013), women that have attained higher levels of knowledge and perceived income level were more adherent with medication and treatment recommendations in comparison to women that have lower levels of knowledge and perceived income. This is largely because with a higher level of income, the patients are able to afford the treatment and medication required for multiple sclerosis, which improves their accessibility. However, in this case, the outcome can be deemed relevant as majority of the patients, 80% of them obtained free-of-cost medication for multiple sclerosis whereas 13% were expected to make partial payment and the remaining 7% undertaking complete payment (Shehadeh-Sheeny et al., 2013).

Limitations

Our research study is subject to a number of limitations. To begin with, the findings of this study ought to be construed with caution, taking into consideration it was conducted with a comparatively small sample of 100 participants, restricted to a particular region of Saudi Arabia, and only individuals speaking one particular language. Secondly, the patients included in the study are those that have relatively low income since 60% are unemployed and 27% have low educational level. Conceivably, this sample of participants might not signify the similar outcomes for other participants emanating from various educational and socioeconomic upbringings. In particular, the low level of education might impede the patient from attaining and having knowledge about the probability of non-adherence to medical course of therapy. The same case applies to the sample of patients that are unemployed as they might not have obtained proper medical care compared to the other population that is employed (Plakas et al., 2016).

In addition, in the study, we deemed it more significant to obtain an impartial indication of adherence instead of risking a social attraction reaction on MMAS-8. Moreover, in every study in each setting, test retest dependability of the MMAS-8 has been established to be outstanding. As a final point, the demographic factors associated to adherence ought to be prudent, as this was a small-scale substantiation study and additional research studies are required. What is more, external validity also ought to take into consideration cautiousness, as our sample resorted to a self-selected suitability, which confines generalization (Plakas et al., 2016). Therefore obtaining diverse data makes it possible to have generalizability.

Conclusion and Recommendation

Adherence to medical interventions is a global problem. Adherence is usually defined as the degree to which patients are taking their drug therapy as prescribed by their physician (Osterberg and Blaschke, 2005). Non-adherence with medication is an intricate and multivariate health care issue. Adherence is delineated as the magnitude to which patients have the capacity to conform to the recommendations for the treatment prescriptions. Medication non-adherence can have damaging effects for the patient, the medical provider, the general practitioner, as well as the medical scientists who are operating to institute the worth of the medication for the target population. Patients might be nonadherent in the course of various phases of their treatment. Such reasons for not abiding to the prescribed treatment are diverse and might be deliberate or inadvertent (Hugtenburg et al., 2013). This study focused on the prevalence of adherence to therapy and the interrelation between adherence to therapy and some important factors among multiple sclerosis patient in KKUH. Results indicate that there is no significant differences between low and high adherence according to age groups (p=0.150), gender (p=0.317), educational levels (p=0.242), job (p=0.422), marital status (p=0.473), income (p=0.442), and place of residence (p=0.057).