The attitudes of pharmacists, students and the general public on mHealth applications for medication adherence

Main Article Content

Michael J. Davies
Alysha Kotadia
Hassan Mughal
Ashraf Hannan
Hamdan Alqarni


Cellular Phone, Computers, Handheld, Medication Adherence, Patient Preference, Pharmacists, Questionnaires, United Kingdom


Background: During recent years mobile technology has developed tremendously and has infiltrated the healthcare field. Mobile healthcare (mHealth) applications, or apps, may be used to support patient adherence to medication thus promoting optimal treatment outcomes and reducing medication wastage.

Objective: This study shall consider the opinions of United Kingdom (UK) based pharmacists, pharmacy undergraduates and members of the general public towards the use of mHealth apps to promote adherence to prescribed medication regimens.

Methods: On Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU) ethical approval, the 25 item questionnaire was distributed to UK registered pharmacists within inner city Liverpool and Manchester (n=500), pharmacy undergraduates studying at LJMU (n=420) and members of the general public within Liverpool City Centre (n=400). The questions were formatted as multiple choice, Likert scales or the open answer type. The data were analysed using simple frequencies, cross tabulations and non-parametric techniques in the SPSS v22 program.

Results: The number of completed questionnaires from the pharmacist, student and general public cohorts were 245, 333 and 400; respectively. The data indicated that the general public rely heavily upon daily routine to take medication as prescribed (54.1%) with mHealth app use being extremely low (1.5%); a similar trend was noted for the pharmacist / student cohorts. The age of the individual is an important consideration, with the younger generation likely to engage with mHealth apps and the older generation less so. Here, education and training are important. Pharmacists (82.3%) would be happy to deliver training packages to the public who would in turn happily receive such training (84%). Key barriers precluding mHealth app use include data reliability, security and technical difficulties.

Conclusion: Adherence apps hold great promise to support the patient and their healthcare needs. In order to increase acceptance and uptake simple, user-friendly designs must be considered and constructed. In addition, such technology requires effective promotion and end user training in order to reach its full potential. Furthermore, the regulation of mobile adherence apps will be essential in order to overcome underlying patient concerns.

Abstract 6033 | PDF Downloads 1751 Table 1. Approaches Taken by the General Public to Adhere to Prescribed Medication Regimens (n=400) Downloads 247 Figure 1. The Willingness of the General Public to Use Mobile Apps to Aid Adherence as a Function of Age (n=400) Downloads 221 Figure 2. The Level of Comfort Expressed by the General Public towards the Use of an External Device with an Adherence App (n=400) Downloads 213 Figure 3. Aspects of an Adherence App Considered Important by the Pharmacist Cohort (n=245) Downloads 246 Figure 4. Aspects of Mobile App Design Considered Important by the Pharmacist Cohort (n=254) Downloads 267 Figure 5. The Degree to which the Pharmacist Cohort would be Happy to Educate the Patient in Mobile App Use (n=254) Downloads 279


1. Ozdalga E, Ozdalga A, Ahuja N. The smartphone in medicine: a review of current and potential use among physicians and students. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(5):e128.

2. Marcano Belisario JS, Huckvale K, Greenfield G, Car J, Gunn LH. Smartphone and tablet self-management apps for asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;11:CD010013. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010013.pub2

3. Davies MJ, Collings M, Fletcher W, Mujtaba H.Pharmacy Apps: a new frontier on the digital landscape? Pharm Pract (Granada). 2014;12(3):453.

4. Cho J, Park D, Lee HE. Cognitive factors of using health apps: systematic analysis of relationships among health consciousness, health information orientation, eHealth literacy, and health app use efficacy. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(5):e125. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3283

5. Börve A, Holst A, Gente-Lidholm A, Molina-Martinez R, Paoli J.Use of the mobile phone multimedia messaging service for teledermatology. J Telemed Telecare. 2012;18(5):292-296. doi: 10.1258/jtt.2012.120206

6. Apple. Available from: (accessed 12th November 2014).

7. MyMeds. Available from: (accessed 12th November 2014).

8. Dayer L, Heldenbrand S, Anderson P, Gubbins PO, Martin BC. Smartphone medication adherence apps: Potential benefits to patients and providers. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2013;53(2):172-181. doi: 10.1331/JAPhA.2013.12202

9. Thomas D. Medication adherence and associated barriers in hypertension management in India. CVD Prevent Contr. 2011;6(1):9-13.

10. Adherence, World Health Organisation 2014 Available: (accessed 10th November 2014).

11. Kim, H.S. Using mobile phones in healthcare management for the elderly. Maturitas. 2014; 1(1): 1-8.

12. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. London: NICE public health guidance 76. Medicines adherence: Involving patients in decisions about prescribed medicines and supporting adherence. January 2009. Available from: (accessed 15th November 2014).

13. Ahmed R, Aslani P.What is patient adherence? A terminology overview. Int J Clin Pharm. 2014;36(1):4-7. doi: 10.1007/s11096-013-9856-y

14. Department of Health. Making best use of medicines: Report of a Department of Health roundtable event hosted by The King’s Fund.London: DH; 2011.

15. Kuntz JL, Safford MM, Singh JA, Phansalkar S, Slight SP, Her QL, Lapointe NA, Mathews R, O'Brien E, Brinkman WB, Hommel K, Farmer KC, Klinger E, Maniam N4, Sobko HJ, Bailey SC, Cho I, Rumptz MH, Vandermeer ML, Hornbrook MC. Patient-centered interventions to improve medication management and adherence: a qualitative review of research findings. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;97(3):310-326. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2014.08.021

16. Hanghøj S, Boisen KA. Self-reported barriers to medication adherence among chronically ill adolescents: a systematic review. J Adolesc Health. 2014;54(2):121-138. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.08.009

17. Khan MU, Shah S, Hameed T. Barriers to and determinants of medication adherence among hypertensive patients attended National Health Service Hospital, Sunderland. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2014;6(2):104-108. doi: 10.4103/0975-7406.129175

18. MacDonell K, Naar-King S, Huszti H, Belzer M. Barriers to medication adherence in behaviorally and perinatally infected youth living with HIV. AIDS Behav. 2013;17(1):86-93. doi: 10.1007/s10461-012-0364-1

19. Patel S, Jacobus-Kantor L, Marshall L, Ritchie C, Kaplinski M, Khurana PS, Katz RJ. Mobilizing your medications: an automated medication reminder application for mobile phones and hypertension medication adherence in a high-risk urban population. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013;7(3):630-639.

20. Vervloet M, Linn AJ, van Weert JC, de Bakker DH, Bouvy ML, van Dijk L. The effectiveness of interventions using electronic reminders to improve adherence to chronic medication: a systematic review of the literature. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012;19(5):696-704. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000748

21. (accessed 12th November 2014).

22. Foster JM, Usherwood T, Smith L, Sawyer SM, Xuan W, Rand CS, Reddel HK. Inhaler reminders improve adherence with controller treatment in primary care patients with asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2014;134(6):1260-1268.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2014.05.041

23. Propeller Health. The impact of asthma and COPD. (accessed 22nd October 2015).

24. Dolan B. Lloyds Pharmacies to sell Proteus smart pills, sensors. Available: (accessed 10th March 2015).

25. Helius for Patients & Families. Available from: (accessed 20th November 2014).

26. Sahoor PK. Efficient security mechanisms for mHealth applications using wireless body sensor networks. Sensors (Basel). 2012;12(9):12606-12633. doi: 10.3390/s120912606

27. Belknap R, Weis S, Brookens A, Au-Yeung KY, Moon G, DiCarlo L, Reves R. Feasibility of an ingestible sensor-based system for monitoring adherence to tuberculosis therapy. PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e53373. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053373

28. Lewis TL, Wyatt JC. mHealth and Mobile Medical Apps: A Framework to Assess Risk and Promote Safer Use. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(9):e210. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3133

29. Lee JA, Nguyen AL, Berg J, Amin A, Bachman M, Guo Y, Evangelista L. Attitudes and preferences on the use of mobile health technology and health games for self-management: interviews with older adults on anticoagulation therapy. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2014;2(3):e32. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.3196

30. Parker SJ, Jessel S, Richardson JE, Reid MC. Older adults are mobile too!Identifying the barriers and facilitators to older adults' use of mHealth for pain management. BMC Geriatr. 2013;13:43. doi: 10.1186/1471-2318-13-43

31. Boulos MN, Brewer AC, Karimkhani C, Buller DB, Dellavalle RP. Mobile medical and health apps: state of the art, concerns, regulatory control and certification. Online J Public Health Inform. 2014;5(3):229. doi: 10.5210/ojphi.v5i3.4814

32. Morris LS, Schulz RM.Patient compliance - an overview. J Clin Pharm Ther. 1992;17(5):283-295.

33. Donovan JL. Patient decision making: the missing ingredient in compliance research. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1995;11(3):443-455.

34. Becker S, Brandl C, Meister S, Nagel E, Miron-Shatz T, Mitchell A, Kribben A, Albrecht UV, Mertens A. Demographic and health related data of users of a mobile application to support drug adherence is associated with usage duration and intensity. PLoS One. 2015;10(1):e0116980. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0116980

35. Arnhold M, Quade M, Kirch W. Mobile applications for diabetics: a systematic review and expert-based usability evaluation considering the special requirements of diabetes patients age 50 years or older. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(4):e104. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2968

36. Mira JJ, Navarro I, Botella F, Borrás F, Nuño-Solinís R, Orozco D, Iglesias-Alonso F, Pérez-Pérez P, Lorenzo S, Toro N. A Spanish pillbox app for elderly patients taking multiple medications: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(4):e99. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3269

37. Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee Available: (accessed 1st October 2015).

38. West JH, Hall PC, Hanson CL, Barnes MD, Giraud-Carrier C, Barrett J. There’s an App for That: Content Analysis of Paid Health and Fitness Apps. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(3):e72. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1977

39. DiDonato KL, Liu Y, Lindsey CC, Hartwig DM, Stoner SC. Community pharmacy patient perceptions of a pharmacy-initiated mobile technology app to improve adherence. Int J Pharm Pract. 2015;23(5):309-319. doi: 10.1111/ijpp.12168

40. Van Velsen L, Beaujean DJ, van Gemert-Pijnen JE. Why mobile health app overload drives us crazy, and how to restore the sanity. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13:23. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-23

41. NICE apps for smartphones and tablets. National Institute for Heath and Care Excellence. Available: (accessed 15th March 2015).

42. Visser BJ, Buijink AW.Need to peer-review medical applications for smart phones. J Telemed Telecare. 2012;18(2):124. doi: 10.1258/jtt.2011.110205

43. Boudreaux ED, Waring ME, Hayes RB, Sadasivam RS, Mullen S, Pagoto S. Evaluating and selecting mobile health apps: strategies for healthcare providers and healthcare organizations. Transl Behav Med. 2014;4(4):363-371. doi: 10.1007/s13142-014-0293-9

44. Inc A. Privacy. Apple. Available from: (accessed 12th November 2014).

Most read articles by the same author(s)