PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16228628

Can human error theory explain non-adherence?

Nick Barber·A Safdar·Bryoney D Franklin
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To apply human error theory to explain non-adherence and examine how well it fits. METHOD: Patients who were taking chronic medication were telephoned and asked whether they had been adhering to their medicine, and if not the reasons were explored and analysed according to a human error theory. RESULTS: Of 105 patients, 87 were contacted by telephone and they took part in the study. Forty-two recalled being non-adherent, 17 of them in the last 7 days; 11 of the 42 were intentionally non-adherent. The errors could be described by human error theory, and it explained unintentional non-adherence well, however, the application of 'rules' was difficult when considering mistakes. The consideration of error producing conditions and latent failures also revealed useful contributing factors. CONCLUSION: Human error theory offers a new and valuable way of understanding non-adherence, and could inform interventions. However, the theory needs further development to explain intentional non-adherence.

Explore related subjects

Drug TherapyHumansSelf AdministrationTreatment RefusalJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Nick Barber, A Safdar, Bryoney D Franklin. 2005. Can human error theory explain non-adherence?. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-005-0355-7

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Chronic myeloid leukemia: standard treatment options.

PURPOSE: Treatment options for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) are discussed. SUMMARY: In the 1980s busulfan and hydroxyurea were the standards of care. These were subsequently replaced by interferon alpha (IFN alpha) based therapy. Currently, bone marrow transplant survival has improved, making this also a viable option. Five-year progression-free survival averaged above 70% for chemotherapeutic options. Transplant survival at 56 months was approximately 60%; however, these survivors were generally cured of disease. The recognition of the role for BCR-ABL in CML has led to the development of specific kinase inhibitors such as imatinib. Clinical trial evidence has demonstrated a clear superiority of imatinib over interferon plus cytarabine, making this the new standard of care in first-line treatment of CML. Resistance to imatinib has been observed, in addition to relapse. The data suggest that the probability of response may be estimated as early as six months after initiation of imatinib therapy. Although combinations of imatinib with IFN alpha show small improvements compared to imatinib therapy alone, the biggest improvements were seen when imatinib doses were doubled. Unfortunately, not all patients can tolerate this increase in dose. The most common mechanism for imatinib resistance is the presence of a mutated BCR-ABL kinase. Several of these mutants have been cloned and characterized. CONCLUSION: Molecular-targeted BCR-ABL kinase inhibitors, such as imatinib, are now first-line treatment for CML. Allogeneic stem cell transplant is still the only proven curable treatment for CML in patients with an appropriate donor. Next generation BCR-ABL kinase inhibitors hold promise for patients with mutated BCR-ABL kinase that confer resistance to imatinib.

Drug Therapy↗
PubMed2006

Novel treatment strategies for chronic myeloid leukemia.

PURPOSE: Despite dramatic advances in the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), resistance to therapeutic agents has emerged as a significant treatment dilemma. Mutations of the BCR-ABL kinase domain, a common mechanism of resistance to imatinib in CML, are discussed. SUMMARY: Several new targeted kinase inhibitors have reached clinical trials and have proved to be efficacious in halting the oncogenic activity of most BCR-ABL mutants. Dasatinib is 300 times more potent than imatinib at BCR-ABL inhibition, has few side effects, and inhibits the SRC family kinases. Nilotinib inhibits BCR-ABL at 20-50 times more potency than imatinib. Both agents were highly effective in treating chronic phase CML but were less effective at treating accelerated phase CML in early phase clinical trials. In addition to these specific kinase inhibitors, farnesyl transferase inhibitors are actively being investigated. Vaccination strategies are undergoing clinical investigation transitioning from animal models to human clinical trials. CONCLUSION: The new kinase inhibitors, dasatinib and nilotinib, are emerging as plausible therapeutic options for the treatment of imatinib-refractory CML.

Drug Therapy↗