Loading

Clinical Research in Pulmonology

Evaluation of Cystic Fibrosis Medication Adherence and Barriers in 2020 and 2022

Research Article | Open Access | Volume 10 | Issue 1

  • 1. Froedtert Health, 9200 W Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
  • 2. Concordia University of Wisconsin School of Pharmacy, 12800 N Lakeshore Drive, Mequon, WI 53097, USA
  • 3. Medical College of Wisconsin School of Pharmacy, 8701 Watertown Plank Rd, Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA
+ Show More - Show Less
Corresponding Authors
Megan Elizabeth Fleischman, Froedtert Health, 9200 W Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI 53226 & Concordia University of Wisconsin School of Pharmacy, 12800 N Lakeshore Drive, Mequon, WI 53097, USA
Abstract

Background: Individuals with Cystic Fibrosis (CF) tend to struggle with adherence due to complex medication regimens comprised of multiple daily dosing and various routes of administration [1]. A Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) can be calculated from refill history to provide an objective measure of overall adherence. This investigation intends to assess changes in medication adherence rates, as measured by MPR, during two distinct timeframes that encompass the introduction of Elexacaftor/Tezacaftor/Ivacaftor (ETI) use for this population.

Methods: Investigators retrospectively gathered patient characteristics and fill histories for patients diagnosed with CF, on medications evaluated in the project, and seen by the adult CF team. A MPR of ≥ 80% was considered adherent. Data was summarized using descriptive statistics. Adherent and less- adherent patients were compared using the Chi-square test for categorical variables and the Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables.

Results: The 2022 assessment period mean composite MPR was 72% (± 23%) compared to 69% (± 25%) in 2020 (p = 0.533). Of the 89 patients in 2022 assessment period, 89% (79/89) were on a CFTR modulator compared to 85% (76) in 2020, 49% (44) were on azithromycin compared to 52% (46) in 2020, 73% (65) were on dornase alpha compared to 92% (82) in 2020, and 48% (43) were on inhaled antibiotics compared to 67% (60) in 2020.

Conclusions: When using composite MPR to assess patients’ adherence to their entire treatment regimen, calculations do not reveal a statistically significant change in adherence despite less patients prescribed CF other non-modulator maintenance therapies two-years after initiating ETI.

Keywords

Medication; Adherence; Outpatient; Clinic; Pharmacist; Pharmacy; Barrier

Citation

Belmonte L, Fleischman M, Hinz R, Wendland E (2024) Evaluation of Cystic Fibrosis Medication Adherence and Barriers in 2020 and 2022. Clin Res Pulmonol 10(1): 1068.

BACKGROUND

Individuals with Cystic Fibrosis (CF) tend to struggle with adherence due to complex medication regimens [1]. Daily treatment regimens can include multiple daily dosing and various routes of administration (oral liquid, oral pills, inhalers, nebulized, inter-nasal, subcutaneous injections, etc.). Survey respondents with CF reported significant time burdens associated with treatments and were on a median of 7 daily therapies [2].

There are many barriers that may impact a patient’s adherence including access to medications, system hindrances and patient understanding. Public insurance coverage has shown to be associated with lower maximum Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume over 1 Second (max ppFEV1) at age six [3]. 5 Patients may suffer from depression, have difficulties with time management, or have perceived doubts about the necessity of treatments [4]. Poor adherence to airway maintenance therapies and inhaled antibiotics can lead to increased risk of exacerbations, weight loss and diminished lung function, which can increase heath care costs and lead to faster disease progression [1-6].

Monitoring adherence through medication refill tracking, by using Medication Possession Ratio (MPR), provides an objective measure for clinicians to gauge overall adherence. MPR has been utilized in the medical literature. One study that included patients with CF at least one prescription fill for a CF pulmonary medication found an association with low MPR and higher acute care costs [6].

In the 2020 assessment period, MPR was used to evaluate medication adherence in patients with CF at Froedtert and the Medical College of Wisconsin (F&MCW) [7]. Since that assessment, more patients at the center have transitioned to the highly effective CFTR modulator, Elexacaftor-Tezacaftor-Ivacaftor (ETI). Patients on ETI have demonstrated substantial improvements in pulmonary function, reductions in exacerbations and patient- reported symptoms [8,9]. It is expected that approximately 90% of the CF population is eligible to be treated with ETI based on having one copy of the F508del-CFTR mutation [10]. With clinical improvements after starting ETI therapy, many patients may have elected to be less adherent or stop other medications classes. There is ongoing investigation supported by the CF Foundation to evaluate if the withdrawal of some burdensome CF therapies has clinical implications.

Froedtert & the Medical College of Wisconsin’s (F&MCW) Pulmonary Clinic aims to improve adherence in the CF population to help promote better overall health and reduce hospitalizations. Investigators intended to assess how medication adherence rates have changed since the previous assessment and identify factors that are associated with medication adherence. Results from this evaluation are important for the CF clinic’s ongoing continuous quality improvement initiatives to improve patients’ medication adherence and will add to the current understanding of patient factors that may lead to changes in medication adherence.

METHODS

This project occurred at a single institution and consisted of a cross-sectional evaluation and a retrospective chart review. The F&MCW Pharmacy Research Committee deemed this project as quality improvement and it was classified as exempt by the Medical College of Wisconsin Institutional Review Board. Independent collection of patient characteristics and medication refill history was completed by four investigators who went through training to increase consistency of data gathered. The investigators cross-checked fill histories and data abstracted from the chart review for accuracy. Patients included in this assessment met the following criteria: (a) ≥ 18 years of age, (b) had a diagnosis of CF, (c) were on at least one of the medications evaluated in the assessment (azithromycin, dornase alpha, inhaled antibiotic [tobramycin, aztreonam, ceftazidime, and colistin], and/or CFTR modulator [elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ ivacaftor, tezacaftor/ivacaftor, ivacaftor]), and (d) were followed by the adult CF team prior to 12/31/21. For each patient meeting these criteria, fill history data was collected from 4/1/2021 to 4/30/2022 and patient characteristic and barriers information was collected up until January 2023. Outcomes and data were then compared to outcomes and data from an earlier time frame of 4/1/2019 through January 2021, which were collected in a similar manner [7]. These timeframes are henceforth referred to as the 2022 assessment period and 2020 assessment period, respectively.

Data Collection

Data for generating the MPR calculation came from electronic medical record refill histories, reports from specialty pharmacies with a CF liaison, and reports from medication manufacturers. For patients with incomplete refill history despite the mentioned methods, investigators then also verified available refill history with SureScripts® and/or called all presumed filling pharmacies to obtain refill dates for the pertinent CF medications. Additionally, MPR calculations accounted for patient hospitalizations and IV antibiotics.

Data pertaining to patient characteristics were gathered from the electronic medical record and PortCF, the national CF registry with data on patients whom provide consent to participate in data collection. The perception of health rating came from a question used in the CF-Questionnaire Revised (QR). Ultimately, the data collected was used to describe patient characteristics for those considered adherent based on a composite MPR of ≥ 80%. For patients with an MPR < 50% in any medication category, the investigational team shared the patient’s MPR calculation results for their medications evaluated and interviewed the patient to assess for barriers in taking CF medications.

Statistical Analysis

Data was summarized using descriptive statistics. Counts and percentages were used to summarize categorical variables. Median and range along with the mean and standard deviation were used for continuous variables. A Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables between patients who were adherent to the prescribed medication and those who were not; unless there were less than 5 individuals in a group, then Fisher’s Exact test was utilized. Wilcoxon rank sum test was used for comparing continuous variables. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Within the 2022 assessment period, 46% (47/103) had an MPR ≥ 80%. Of those with an MPR ≥ 80%, the mean age was 36.9 ± 13.1 (p = 0.017), 60% were male (28/47, p = 0.092), mean FEV1 was 77.9 ± 26.0 (n = 46/47, p = 0.758), mean number of pharmacies 2.3 ± 0.8, (p = 0.624), 68% had commercial insurance (n = 32/47, p = 0.557), and 54% perceived their health a good (n = 25/47, p = 0.853) (Table 1).

Table 1: Patient characteristics within both assessment timeframes.

 

 

Characteristics

2020, N = 105

2022, N = 103

Non- Adherent

Adherent

Non- Adherent

Adherent

N = 62

N = 43

N = 56

N = 47

Age (Mean ± SD)

31.5 ± 9.8*

38.4 ± 12.9*

31.0 ± 10.3†

36.9 ± 13.1†

Sex

Male

32 (51.6)

25 (58.1)

27 (48.2)

28 (59.6)

Female

30 (48.4)

18 (41.9)

29 (51.8)

17 (36.2)

Q

0

0

0

2 (4.3)

FEV1 (Mean ± SD)

71.8 ± 25.2

71.7 ± 26.3

75.8 ± 26.7

77.9 ± 26.0

No value

3

0

2

1

Number of Filling Pharmacies (Mean ± SD)

2.5 ±1.2

2.5 ± 1.3

2.3 ± 0.7

2.3 ± 0.8

Primary Insurance

Commercial

49 (79.0)

32 (74.4)

36 (64.3)

32 (68.1)

Medicaid

7 (11.3)

4 (9.3)

6 (10.7)

7 (14.9)

Medicare

6 (9.7)

7 (16.3)

14 (25.0)

8 (17.0)

Perception of Health

Excellent

-

-

13 (24.1)

11 (23.9)

Good

-

-

28 (51.9)

25 (54.3)

Fair

-

-

11 (20.4)

7 (15.2)

Poor/Very poor

-

-

2 (3.7)

3 (6.5)

No Value

-

-

2

1

*p = 0.006; †p = 0.017; SD = Standard Deviation; Q: Queer; FEV1: Forced Expiratory Volume over 1 Second

Data Comparison between Assessment Periods

Among the 103 patients evaluated in the 2022 assessment period, 89 of those patients also had data in the 2020 assessment period. Of those 89 patients in the 2022 assessment period, 89% (79/89) were on a CFTR modulator compared to 85% (76) in 2020 (p = 0.5), 49% (44) were on azithromycin compared to 52% (46) in 2020 (p = 0.8), 73% (65) were on dornase alpha compared to 92% (82) in 2020 (p < 0.001), and 48% (43) were on inhaled antibiotics compared to 67% (60) in 2020 (p < 0.01).

Table 2: MPR Calculations for 2020 and 2022 assessment periods.

 

All patients

Patients in both time frames (N = 89)

2020

(N = 105)

2022

(N = 103)

2020

2022

Composite MPR

Median (min - max)

0.74

(0.00 -1.00)

0.78

(0.00 - 1.00)

0.74

(0.00 - 1.0)

0.79

(0.00 - 1.0)

Mean ± SD

0.67 ± 0.28

0.70 ± 0.25

0.69 ± 0.25

0.72 ± 0.23

MPR modulators

Median (min - max)

0.97

(0.00 -1.00)

0.92

(0.21 - 1.00)

0.96

(0.00 - 1.0)

0.92

(0.43 - 1.0)

Mean ± SD

0.86 ± 0.25

0.88 ± 0.15

0.88 ± 0.20

0.89 ± 0.12

Not prescribed

14 (13%)

10 (10%)

10 (11%)

7 (8%)

No MPR values*

3 (3%)

3 (3%)

3 (3%)

3 (3%)

MPR Azithromycin

Median (min - max)

0.78

(0.00 -1.01)

0.84

(0.04 - 1.00)

0.74

(0.00 - 1.0)

0.84

(0.04 - 1.0)

Mean ± SD

0.70 ± 0.32

0.71 ± 0.31

0.69 ± 0.31

0.73 ± 0.29

Not prescribed

47 (45%)

55 (53%)

43 (48%)

45 (51%)

MPR Dornase Alpha

Median (min - max)

0.64

(0.00 -1.00)

0.67

(0.00 - 1.00)

0.64

(0.00 - 1.0)

0.70

(0.00 - 1.0)

Mean ± SD

0.59 ± 0.34

0.55 ± 0.35

0.61 ± 0.32

0.56 ± 0.35

Not prescribed

9 (9%)

25 (24%)

7 (8%)

24 (27%)

MPR Inhaled Antibiotics

Median (min - max)

0.7 (0.0 - 1.0)

0.7 (0.0 - 1.0)

0.71

(0.00 - 1.0)

0.73

(0.00 - 1.0)

Mean ± SD

0.6 ± 0.3

0.6 ± 0.3

0.63 ± 0.31

0.65 ± 0.31

Not prescribed

33 (31%)

55 (53%)

29 (33%)

46 (52%)

ETI = Elexacaftor/Tezacaftor/Ivacaftor; MPR = Medication Possession Ratio; SD = standard deviation;

*Patients who were receiving ETI therapy from manufacturer extension study.

Table 2 displays the medication possession ratio calculated for these patients as well as the full study population evaluated in both assessment periods. For the 89 patients in each assessment period, the 2022 assessment period mean composite MPR was 72% (± 23%) compared to 69% (± 25%) in 2020 (p = 0.533) (Table 2).

When reviewing total number of patients in both assessment periods, irrespective of patients with data in both assessment periods, mean adherence by medication category remained relatively unchanged (Table 2). Overall, mean adherence to modulators was in the upper 80% while mean adherence to other non-modulator maintenance therapies was 70% for azithromycin, mid to upper 50% for dornase alpha, and 60% for inhaled antibiotics. Additionally, mean composite MPR was still slightly higher in the 2022 assessment period compared to the 2020 assessment period, but this difference remained non- significant (Table 2).

Barriers to Adherence

For patients with data in both assessment periods and a MPR < 50%, the top barriers to medication adherence identified in the 2022 assessment period included coordination challenges (18/55; 33%), treatment burden (17/55; 31%), patients feeling as though CF medications are not necessary (16/55; 29%), patients feeling good on modulator therapy (15/55; 27%), patients having excess supply of CF medication (14/55; 26%), and time management issues (13/55; 24%) (Figure 1).

Reasons for non-adherence within 2020 and 2022 assessment periods. CF = Cystic Fibrosis; ETI = Elexacaftor/Tezacaftor/Ivacaftor; f/u = follow up

Figure 1: Reasons for non-adherence within 2020 and 2022 assessment periods.

CF = Cystic Fibrosis; ETI = Elexacaftor/Tezacaftor/Ivacaftor; f/u = follow up

DISCUSSION

This analysis used retrospective data to evaluate relationships between CF medication adherence and patient variables. Based on patient characteristics in both assessment periods, only age was statistically significant for a difference in adherence, where patients defined as adherent (MPR > 80%) had a higher mean age than non-adherent patients. This finding is similar to results of a retrospective cohort analysis for patients with CF with ≥ 1 dornase alfa pharmacy claim where overall adherence began to increase in patients in their early to mid-thirties compared to a decline in adherence seen between the ages of 13-30 [11]. It can be hypothesized that older patients see the value in taking their medications if they have a worse prognosis or had a history of better disease management success with adherence.

It is important to note, however, that adherence is difficult to accurately capture as it depends on many factors including type of measure and medications [11,12]. In addition to this, our data may highlight that our patient population may have been healthier than the general CF population since the providers at F&MCW adult CF clinic agreed to stopping therapies in patients with high ppFEV1 values and no evidence of bronchiectasis. Despite a significantly lower number of patients taking inhaled treatments in the second time frame, the adherence to other non-modulator maintenance therapies remained < 80%, which suggests a continued need to optimize adherence for those maintained on other non-modulator maintenance therapies.

Based on our findings, a slightly higher portion of patients in the 2022 assessment period had modulators prescribed than in the 2020 assessment period while fewer were prescribed dornase alpha and inhaled antibiotics (i.e. tobramycin, aztreonam, ceftazidime, and colistin). At our institution, there may have been fewer patients prescribed non-modulator maintenance therapies over time as a means to simplify a patient’s regimen if patients and providers were in agreement that the patient’s lung function and overall health had been stable after having been on highly effective modulator therapy. Similarly, in the SIMPLIFY trial, results found that discontinuation of dornase alpha and hypertonic saline in certain patients with CF is non-inferior to continuation of such therapies with respect to short-term change in lung function [10]. The goal of the SIMPLIFY study was to better understand if it is safe to stop these often times burdensome CF airway clearance therapies as it is not known if these therapies further improve lung function over what is already gained by patients taking a highly effective CF modulator.

For patients with MPRs < 50%, the most common reported barriers were coordination challenges,   treatment   burden, and CF medications being perceived as unnecessary (Table 2). However, the number of patients that reported a barrier of “treatment burden” decreased between assessment periods as did the number who reported they perceived CF medications were unnecessary. This could be due to fewer people being on inhaled therapies as we saw in the MPR calculations, presented in (Table 2), patients feeling better on ETI therapy, or education they received in 2020 about therapies when discussing barriers. Additionally, the clinic (re)emphasized education about modulator efficacy in disease state management as well as safety monitoring needs with implementing workflows for follow-up which could have contributed to fewer reports of nonadherence to clinic visits as a listed barrier to adherence in the second time frame. One unexpected topic patients mentioned in the 2022 assessment period was their comfort with discussing adherence barriers with the treatment team after direct conversations about non-adherence were introduced in the 2020 assessment period. This finding may be reflected in the change observed with the barrier “denied nonadherence” and emphasizes the importance of CF treatment teams encouraging direct yet empathetic conversations with patients.

Lastly, this assessment is not without its limitations. Data collected retrospectively has inherent limitations as it is collected based on historical information requiring recollection, thus subject to recall bias, and accurate record keeping. There is also a risk for errors in transmission when multiple individuals collect and enter data (i.e. collecting fill records over the phone), which was necessary when a fill report could not be run for certain medications or pharmacies. However, the investigators implemented measures to mitigate these risks for inter-rater bias by training those who collected data, cross checking data that was collected and use of more accurate historical records based on what they learned from data collection in the first timeframe.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on findings within this assessment, patient characteristics that would suggest better or worse adherence to CF regimens were not identified except for the adherent populations having a significantly older mean age. A drastic decrease in number of patients on inhaled therapies was noted, which may explain changes in barriers to adherence, but this did not seem to impact composite adherence based on our MPR calculations. At this time, conclusions cannot be made on health outcomes as this assessment was not structured to do so. For this reason, there is still a need for literature to help CF researchers better understand what other non-modulator maintenance therapies are indicated in patients on highly effective modulators and further guidance on when such therapies can be discontinued.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank Patricia Pfahler, BSN, RN and David Schmid, BSN, APNP for their help with data acquisition.

CONTRIBUTORS

Each author had full access to the data and takes responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of this study. All authors were responsible for acquisition of data and contributed to and approved of the final submitted manuscript. LB and MEF were responsible for the study design, data analysis and interpretation, and the writing of the manuscript.

ETHICS

This project was approved (PRO00043724) by the Pharmacy Research Committee with Froedtert and the Medical College of Wisconsin as a quality improvement project and not human subjects research it was classified as exempt by the Medical College of Wisconsin Institutional Review Board.

REFERENCES
  1. Dodd ME, Webb AK. Understanding non-compliance with treatment in adults with cystic fibrosis. J R Soc Med. 2000; 93: 2-8. PMID: 10911812; PMCID: PMC1305877.
  2. Sawicki GS, Sellers DE, Robinson WM. High treatment burden in adults with cystic fibrosis: challenges to disease self-management. J Cyst Fibros. 2009; 8: 91-96. doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2008.09.007. Epub 2008 Oct 26. PMID: 18952504; PMCID: PMC2680350.
  3. Dickinson KM, Psoter KJ, Riekert KA, Collaco JM. Association between insurance variability and early lung function in children with cystic fibrosis. J Cyst Fibros. 2022; 21: 104-110. doi: 10.1016/j. jcf.2021.06.006. Epub 2021 Jun 24. PMID: 34175244; PMCID: PMC8695631.
  4. Bishay LC, Sawicki GS. Strategies to optimize treatment adherence in adolescent patients with cystic fibrosis. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 2016; 7: 117-124. doi: 10.2147/AHMT.S95637. PMID: 27799838; PMCID: PMC5085292.
  5. Eakin MN, Bilderback A, Boyle MP, Mogayzel PJ, Riekert KA. Longitudinal association between medication adherence and lung health in people with cystic fibrosis. J Cyst Fibros. 201; 10: 258-264. doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2011.03.005. Epub 2011 Mar 31. PMID: 21458391; PMCID: PMC3114200.
  6. Quittner AL, Zhang J, Marynchenko M, Chopra PA, Signorovitch J, Yushkina Y, et al. Pulmonary medication adherence and health- care use in cystic fibrosis. Chest. 2014; 146: 142-151. doi: 10.1378/ chest.13-1926. PMID: 24480974.
  7. Fleischman M.  272: Patient  factors based on  adherence to  cystic fibrosis medications. Journal of Cystic Fibrosis. 2021; 20: S131.
  8. Middleton PG, Mall MA, D?evínek P, Lands LC, McKone EF, Polineni D, et al; VX17-445-102 Study Group. Elexacaftor-Tezacaftor-Ivacaftor for Cystic Fibrosis with a Single Phe508del Allele. N Engl J Med. 2019; 38: 1809-1819. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1908639. Epub 2019 Oct 31. PMID: 31697873; PMCID: PMC7282384.
  9. Heijerman HGM, McKone EF, Downey DG, Van Braeckel E, Rowe SM, Tullis E, et al; VX17-445-103 Trial Group. Efficacy and safety of the elexacaftor plus tezacaftor plus ivacaftor combination regimen in people with cystic fibrosis homozygous for the F508del mutation: a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2019; 394: 1940- 1948. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32597-8. Epub 2019 Oct 31. Erratum in: Lancet. 2020 May 30; 395(10238): 1694. doi: 10.1016/ S0140-6736(20)31021-7. PMID: 31679946; PMCID: PMC7571408.
  10. Mayer-Hamblett N, Ratjen F, Russell R, Donaldson SH, Riekert KA, Sawicki GS, et al ; SIMPLIFY Study Group. Discontinuation versus continuation of hypertonic saline or dornase alfa in modulator treated people with cystic fibrosis (SIMPLIFY): results from two parallel, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trials. Lancet Respir Med. 2023; 11: 329-340. doi: 10.1016/S2213- 2600(22)00434-9. Epub 2022 Nov 4. PMID: 36343646; PMCID: PMC10065895.
  11. Nasr SZ, Chou W, Villa KF, Chang E, Broder MS. Adherence to dornase alfa treatment among commercially insured patients with cystic fibrosis. J Med Econ. 2013; 16: 801-808. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2013.787427. Epub 2013 Apr 4. PMID: 23506540.
  12. Hoo ZH, Curley R, Walters SJ, Campbell MJ, Wildman MJ. Exploring the implications of different approaches to estimate centre-level adherence using objective adherence data in an adult cystic fibrosis centre - a retrospective observational study. J Cyst Fibros. 2020; 19: 162-167. doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2019.10.008. Epub 2019 Oct 31. PMID: 31678011.

Belmonte L, Fleischman M, Hinz R, Wendland E (2024) Evaluation of Cystic Fibrosis Medication Adherence and Barriers in 2020 and 2022. Clin Res Pulmonol 10(1): 1068

Received : 09 Jul 2024
Accepted : 01 Aug 2024
Published : 05 Aug 2024
Journals
Annals of Otolaryngology and Rhinology
ISSN : 2379-948X
Launched : 2014
JSM Schizophrenia
Launched : 2016
Journal of Nausea
Launched : 2020
JSM Internal Medicine
Launched : 2016
JSM Hepatitis
Launched : 2016
JSM Oro Facial Surgeries
ISSN : 2578-3211
Launched : 2016
Journal of Human Nutrition and Food Science
ISSN : 2333-6706
Launched : 2013
JSM Regenerative Medicine and Bioengineering
ISSN : 2379-0490
Launched : 2013
JSM Spine
ISSN : 2578-3181
Launched : 2016
Archives of Palliative Care
ISSN : 2573-1165
Launched : 2016
JSM Nutritional Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3203
Launched : 2017
Annals of Neurodegenerative Disorders
ISSN : 2476-2032
Launched : 2016
Journal of Fever
ISSN : 2641-7782
Launched : 2017
JSM Bone Marrow Research
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2016
JSM Mathematics and Statistics
ISSN : 2578-3173
Launched : 2014
Journal of Autoimmunity and Research
ISSN : 2573-1173
Launched : 2014
JSM Arthritis
ISSN : 2475-9155
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Neck Cancer-Cases and Reviews
ISSN : 2573-1610
Launched : 2016
JSM General Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2573-1564
Launched : 2016
JSM Anatomy and Physiology
ISSN : 2573-1262
Launched : 2016
JSM Dental Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1548
Launched : 2016
Annals of Emergency Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1017
Launched : 2016
Annals of Mens Health and Wellness
ISSN : 2641-7707
Launched : 2017
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Health Care
ISSN : 2576-0084
Launched : 2018
Journal of Chronic Diseases and Management
ISSN : 2573-1300
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vaccines and Immunization
ISSN : 2378-9379
Launched : 2014
JSM Heart Surgery Cases and Images
ISSN : 2578-3157
Launched : 2016
Annals of Reproductive Medicine and Treatment
ISSN : 2573-1092
Launched : 2016
JSM Brain Science
ISSN : 2573-1289
Launched : 2016
JSM Biomarkers
ISSN : 2578-3815
Launched : 2014
JSM Biology
ISSN : 2475-9392
Launched : 2016
Archives of Stem Cell and Research
ISSN : 2578-3580
Launched : 2014
Annals of Clinical and Medical Microbiology
ISSN : 2578-3629
Launched : 2014
JSM Pediatric Surgery
ISSN : 2578-3149
Launched : 2017
Journal of Memory Disorder and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-319X
Launched : 2016
JSM Tropical Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2578-3165
Launched : 2016
JSM Head and Face Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3793
Launched : 2016
JSM Cardiothoracic Surgery
ISSN : 2573-1297
Launched : 2016
JSM Bone and Joint Diseases
ISSN : 2578-3351
Launched : 2017
JSM Bioavailability and Bioequivalence
ISSN : 2641-7812
Launched : 2017
JSM Atherosclerosis
ISSN : 2573-1270
Launched : 2016
Journal of Genitourinary Disorders
ISSN : 2641-7790
Launched : 2017
Journal of Fractures and Sprains
ISSN : 2578-3831
Launched : 2016
Journal of Autism and Epilepsy
ISSN : 2641-7774
Launched : 2016
Annals of Marine Biology and Research
ISSN : 2573-105X
Launched : 2014
JSM Health Education & Primary Health Care
ISSN : 2578-3777
Launched : 2016
JSM Communication Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3807
Launched : 2016
Annals of Musculoskeletal Disorders
ISSN : 2578-3599
Launched : 2016
Annals of Virology and Research
ISSN : 2573-1122
Launched : 2014
JSM Renal Medicine
ISSN : 2573-1637
Launched : 2016
Journal of Muscle Health
ISSN : 2578-3823
Launched : 2016
JSM Genetics and Genomics
ISSN : 2334-1823
Launched : 2013
JSM Anxiety and Depression
ISSN : 2475-9139
Launched : 2016
Clinical Journal of Heart Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7766
Launched : 2016
Annals of Medicinal Chemistry and Research
ISSN : 2378-9336
Launched : 2014
JSM Pain and Management
ISSN : 2578-3378
Launched : 2016
JSM Women's Health
ISSN : 2578-3696
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in HIV or AIDS
ISSN : 2374-0094
Launched : 2013
Journal of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Obesity
ISSN : 2333-6692
Launched : 2013
Journal of Substance Abuse and Alcoholism
ISSN : 2373-9363
Launched : 2013
JSM Neurosurgery and Spine
ISSN : 2373-9479
Launched : 2013
Journal of Liver and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2379-0830
Launched : 2014
Journal of Drug Design and Research
ISSN : 2379-089X
Launched : 2014
JSM Clinical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2373-938X
Launched : 2013
JSM Bioinformatics, Genomics and Proteomics
ISSN : 2576-1102
Launched : 2014
JSM Chemistry
ISSN : 2334-1831
Launched : 2013
Journal of Trauma and Care
ISSN : 2573-1246
Launched : 2014
JSM Surgical Oncology and Research
ISSN : 2578-3688
Launched : 2016
Annals of Food Processing and Preservation
ISSN : 2573-1033
Launched : 2016
Journal of Radiology and Radiation Therapy
ISSN : 2333-7095
Launched : 2013
JSM Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
ISSN : 2578-3572
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical Pathology
ISSN : 2373-9282
Launched : 2013
Annals of Cardiovascular Diseases
ISSN : 2641-7731
Launched : 2016
Journal of Behavior
ISSN : 2576-0076
Launched : 2016
Annals of Clinical and Experimental Metabolism
ISSN : 2572-2492
Launched : 2016
Clinical Research in Infectious Diseases
ISSN : 2379-0636
Launched : 2013
JSM Microbiology
ISSN : 2333-6455
Launched : 2013
Journal of Urology and Research
ISSN : 2379-951X
Launched : 2014
Journal of Family Medicine and Community Health
ISSN : 2379-0547
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pregnancy and Care
ISSN : 2578-336X
Launched : 2017
JSM Cell and Developmental Biology
ISSN : 2379-061X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Aquaculture and Research
ISSN : 2379-0881
Launched : 2014
Journal of Immunology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6714
Launched : 2013
Annals of Forensic Research and Analysis
ISSN : 2378-9476
Launched : 2014
JSM Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
ISSN : 2333-7109
Launched : 2013
Annals of Breast Cancer Research
ISSN : 2641-7685
Launched : 2016
Annals of Gerontology and Geriatric Research
ISSN : 2378-9409
Launched : 2014
Journal of Sleep Medicine and Disorders
ISSN : 2379-0822
Launched : 2014
JSM Burns and Trauma
ISSN : 2475-9406
Launched : 2016
Chemical Engineering and Process Techniques
ISSN : 2333-6633
Launched : 2013
Annals of Clinical Cytology and Pathology
ISSN : 2475-9430
Launched : 2014
JSM Allergy and Asthma
ISSN : 2573-1254
Launched : 2016
Journal of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
ISSN : 2334-2307
Launched : 2013
Annals of Sports Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2379-0571
Launched : 2014
JSM Sexual Medicine
ISSN : 2578-3718
Launched : 2016
Annals of Vascular Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2378-9344
Launched : 2014
JSM Biotechnology and Biomedical Engineering
ISSN : 2333-7117
Launched : 2013
Journal of Hematology and Transfusion
ISSN : 2333-6684
Launched : 2013
JSM Environmental Science and Ecology
ISSN : 2333-7141
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cardiology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2333-6676
Launched : 2013
JSM Nanotechnology and Nanomedicine
ISSN : 2334-1815
Launched : 2013
Journal of Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
ISSN : 2475-9473
Launched : 2016
JSM Ophthalmology
ISSN : 2333-6447
Launched : 2013
Journal of Pharmacology and Clinical Toxicology
ISSN : 2333-7079
Launched : 2013
Annals of Psychiatry and Mental Health
ISSN : 2374-0124
Launched : 2013
Medical Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
ISSN : 2333-6439
Launched : 2013
Annals of Pediatrics and Child Health
ISSN : 2373-9312
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Pharmaceutics
ISSN : 2379-9498
Launched : 2014
JSM Foot and Ankle
ISSN : 2475-9112
Launched : 2016
JSM Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia
ISSN : 2378-9565
Launched : 2014
Journal of Addiction Medicine and Therapy
ISSN : 2333-665X
Launched : 2013
Journal of Veterinary Medicine and Research
ISSN : 2378-931X
Launched : 2013
Annals of Public Health and Research
ISSN : 2378-9328
Launched : 2014
Annals of Orthopedics and Rheumatology
ISSN : 2373-9290
Launched : 2013
Journal of Clinical Nephrology and Research
ISSN : 2379-0652
Launched : 2014
Annals of Community Medicine and Practice
ISSN : 2475-9465
Launched : 2014
Annals of Biometrics and Biostatistics
ISSN : 2374-0116
Launched : 2013
JSM Clinical Case Reports
ISSN : 2373-9819
Launched : 2013
Journal of Cancer Biology and Research
ISSN : 2373-9436
Launched : 2013
Journal of Surgery and Transplantation Science
ISSN : 2379-0911
Launched : 2013
Journal of Dermatology and Clinical Research
ISSN : 2373-9371
Launched : 2013
JSM Gastroenterology and Hepatology
ISSN : 2373-9487
Launched : 2013
Annals of Nursing and Practice
ISSN : 2379-9501
Launched : 2014
JSM Dentistry
ISSN : 2333-7133
Launched : 2013
Author Information X