首页> 外文OA文献 >Ethical acceptability of offering financial incentives for taking antipsychotic depot medication: Patients' and clinicians' perspectives after a 12-month randomized controlled trial
【2h】

Ethical acceptability of offering financial incentives for taking antipsychotic depot medication: Patients' and clinicians' perspectives after a 12-month randomized controlled trial

机译:提供经济诱因服用抗精神病药的药物的伦理可接受性:经过12个月的随机对照试验,患者和临床医生的观点

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

textabstractBackground: A randomized controlled trial 'Money for Medication'(M4M) was conducted in which patients were offered financial incentives for taking antipsychotic depot medication. This study assessed the attitudes and ethical considerations of patients and clinicians who participated in this trial. Methods: Three mental healthcare institutions in secondary psychiatric care in the Netherlands participated in this study. Patients (n = 169), 18-65 years, diagnosed with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or another psychotic disorder who had been prescribed antipsychotic depot medication, were randomly assigned to receive 12 months of either treatment as usual plus a financial reward for each depot of medication received (intervention group) or treatment as usual alone (control group). Structured questionnaires were administered after the 12-month intervention period. Data were available for 133 patients (69 control and 64 intervention) and for 97 clinicians. Results: Patients (88%) and clinicians (81%) indicated that financial incentives were a good approach to improve medication adherence. Ethical concerns were categorized according to the four-principles approach (autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice). Patients and clinicians alike mentioned various advantages of M4M in clinical practice, such as increased medication adherence and improved illness insight; but also disadvantages such as reduced intrinsic motivation, loss of autonomy and feelings of dependence. Conclusions: Overall, patients evaluated financial incentives as an effective method of improving medication adherence and were willing to accept this reward during clinical treatment. Clinicians were also positive about the use of this intervention in daily practice. Ethical concerns are discussed in terms of patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. We conclude that this intervention is ethically acceptable under certain conditions, and that further research is necessary to clarify issues of benefit, motivation and the preferred size and duration of the incentive. Trial registration: Nederlands Trial Register, number NTR2350.
机译:textabstract背景:进行了一项随机对照试验'Money for Medication'(M4M),其中为患者提供了服用抗精神病药的经济诱因。这项研究评估了参加该试验的患者和临床医生的态度和道德考量。方法:荷兰的三家二级精神病护理机构都参加了这项研究。患者(n = 169),年龄18-65岁,被诊断出患有精神分裂症,精神分裂症或其他精神病,并已开具抗精神病药的药物,被随机分配为接受12个月的常规治疗,并为每个患者提供经济奖励接受药物治疗(干预组)或单独照常治疗(对照组)。经过12个月的干预期后,组织了结构化问卷。有133位患者(69位对照和64位干预)和97位临床医生的数据可用。结果:患者(88%)和临床医生(81%)表示,经济激励是改善药物依从性的好方法。道德问题根据四项原则进行分类(自治,慈善,非恶意和正义)。患者和临床医生都提到了M4M在临床实践中的各种优势,例如增加了对药物的依从性和对疾病的了解。但也有缺点,例如内在动机减少,自主权丧失和依赖感。结论:总体而言,患者将经济奖励措施视为改善药物依从性的有效方法,并愿意在临床治疗期间接受此项奖励。临床医生也对在日常实践中使用这种干预措施持积极态度。从患者的自主权,慈善,非恶意和正义的角度讨论伦理问题。我们得出的结论是,在某些情况下,这种干预在伦理上是可以接受的,并且有必要进行进一步的研究来阐明利益,动机以及激励的首选规模和持续时间等问题。试用注册:Nederlands试用注册,编号NTR2350。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号