Article Text

PDF
Systematic review of the factors affecting cat and dog owner compliance with pharmaceutical treatment recommendations
  1. Kathryn Jennifer Wareham1,
  2. Marnie Louise Brennan1 and
  3. Rachel S Dean1,2
  1. 1Centre for Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
  2. 2VetPartners, York, UK
  1. E-mail for correspondence; rachel.dean{at}vetpartners.co.uk

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review is to describe and assess the quality of the existing evidence base concerning factors that influence the compliance of cat and dog owners to pharmaceutical and specifically polypharmacy treatment recommendations. PubMed, CAB Abstracts and Google were searched to identify relevant literature and search results were filtered according to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Standardised data extraction and critical appraisal were carried out on each included study, and a Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine level of evidence grading was applied. Of the 8589 studies, eight studies were included in the review. Majority (five of eight) of the included studies were examining compliance with short-term antimicrobial therapies and none examined polypharmacy. Multiple definitions of compliance, methods of measurement and different factors potentially affecting compliance were used. Factors reported to have affected compliance in at least one study were dosing regimen, discussion of dosing regimen in light of owners’ circumstances, consultation time, disease, month of consultation/treatment, physical risk, social risk and method of administration. The evidence available regarding factors affecting client compliance with pharmaceutical treatment recommendations in cats and dogs is scarce and of poor quality.

  • systematic review
  • compliance
  • cats
  • dogs
  • polypharmacy
  • pharmacology

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors Elanco Animal Health and all of the authors were involved in developing the aim for this review. The authors developed the protocol and methodology, undertook the review and wrote the manuscript, which Elanco Animal Health reviewed before submission.

  • Funding This study was funded by Elanco Animal Health. Elanco Animal Health paid the salary of KJW to undertake this review.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.