Ethical, philosophical, and practical considerations in adherence to therapy in sleep medicine

We consider a series of linked philosophical issues created by non-adherence to therapy in sleep medicine.

First, the difficulty of measuring rates of adherence creates an epistemic problem regarding the efficacy of prescribed treatments. Secondly, as diseases are often classified as refractory based on apparent failure of standard medicines, the validity of this classification faces a similar epistemic crisis. This in turn produces ethical issues when therapies are restricted to cases deemed refractory. It also calls into question, if the patient does not take the medicines as prescribed, what they do with them; and the prospect of potential drug diversion arises. Education of patients seems to be of limited help in addressing these issues; what may be needed is a revision of the patient-prescriber relationship to move away from blame when nonadherence occurs. We close by revisiting an ancient debate in the philosophy of action, which may shed light on what such a revised relationship would require.

More honest and trusting patient-physician relationships, and a much more accurate sense of when nonadherence is occurring and why, may result from a better practical and philosophical understanding of the patient's decision-making.