Skip to main content

Table 6 Applying the APEASE criteria to select useful policy categories based on contextual analysis

From: Theory-driven development of a medication adherence intervention delivered by eHealth and transplant team in allogeneic stem cell transplantation: the SMILe implementation science project

Intervention function

Policy category

Affordability

Practicability

(Cost-)Effectiveness

Acceptability

(Side-effects) / Safety

Equity

Does the intervention function meet the APEASE criteria, comments why yes/no?

 

Communication/ marketing

±

+

±

++

+

+

NO – not affordable, not suitable in our situation

 

Guidelines

–

±

±

+

++

++

NO – national level ➔ not affordable in our situation

 

Fiscal measures

–

±

±

±

+

++

NO – not affordable in our situation:

Germany: Financial burden due to travelling to Tx center, drug usually paid

Switzerland: Patients pay Deductible + 10%

Education, Persuasion, Training, Modeling, Enablement

Regulation

+

+

+

+

+

++

YES – center level ➔ regulation about what, how & how long contact with health care provider can continue

 

Legislation

      

NO – not relevant, not practicable in our setting

 

Environmental/ social planning

±

±

+

+

+

++

NO – WLAN access ➔ not affordable in our situation

Education, Persuasion, Training, Modelling, Enablement

Service provision

++

++

+

++

++

++

YES – e.g., support & checks via phone / improvement of performance at visits, introduction of a CC

  1. CC Care-coordinator
  2. (++ very promising) (+ promising) (± not promising but worth considering) (− unacceptable)