			Home About us Contact

Adherence Data (adherence + data)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	75%

Selected Abstracts

An investigation of medication adherence to 5-aminosalicylic acid therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis, using self-report and urinary drug excretion measurements

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, Issue 11-12 2009
T. MOSHKOVSKA
Summary Background, Non-adherence to 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) medication can limit the established benefits of this therapy in ulcerative colitis (UC). Aim, To determine rates and predictors of non-adherence to 5-ASA therapy in UC patients. Methods, Medication adherence was assessed using self-report data and urinary drug excretion measurements. Participants completed a study-specific questionnaire and two validated questionnaires: Beliefs about Medicine Questionnaire (BMQ)-Specific and Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale. Results, A total of 169 participants provided self-report adherence data; 151 also provided urine samples. Adherence rates were 111/151 (68%) according to self-report and 90/151 (60%) according to urine analysis, but the two measures were not correlated (,2 = 0.12, P = 0.725). Logistic regression identified a significant association between self-reported non-adherence and younger age [odds ratio (OR) for increased age 0.954, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.932,0.976] and also doubts about personal need for medication (OR for BMQ , Specific Necessity scores 0.578, 95% CI 0.366,0.913). For non-adherence based on urine analysis, only South Asian ethnicity was independently associated with non-adherence (OR 2.940, 95% CI 1.303,6.638). Conclusions, Our observations confirm the difficulty of accurately assessing medication adherence. Nonmodifiable (younger age, South Asian ethnicity) and potentially modifiable (medication beliefs) predictors of non-adherence were identified. [source]

Refill adherence for patients with asthma and COPD: comparison of a pharmacy record database with manually collected repeat prescriptions,

PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, Issue 4 2007
Kristin Krigsman MSc
Abstract Purpose To compare refill adherence data based on two different methods of data capturing, that is, manually collected repeat prescriptions and a pharmacy record database. Methods The study comprised a comparison of adherence data from manually collected repeat prescriptions of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) drugs with fixed dosages dispensed in 2002 and the corresponding data from a pharmacy record database. Data were collected in the county of Jämtland in Sweden. Refill adherence was calculated for the different collection methods. Results Data from 285 manually collected repeat prescriptions for asthma/COPD drugs for 2002 showed that 35% of the prescribings had been satisfactory refilled, while 42% showed an undersupply and 23% an oversupply. The pharmacy record database had 490 prescribings for asthma/COPD drugs registered in 2002, 28% of these had a satisfactory refill adherence, while 43% showed an undersupply, and 29% an oversupply. Based on the database it could be shown that 11% of the individuals had used more than one repeat prescription of the same medicine during 2002. Based on the pharmacy record database for 1999,2002, it was shown that 29% of the prescribings had been satisfactory refilled whereas undersupply increased (53%) and oversupply decreased (18%) as compared to the 1-year data. Conclusions Refill adherence determined from manually collected repeat prescriptions and from a pharmacy record database did not differ for a 1-year period. Four-year data might give a better overview of patients' refill adherence than 1-year data. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

Calculating Sample Size for Studies with Expected All-or-None Nonadherence and Selection Bias

BIOMETRICS, Issue 2 2009
Michelle D. Shardell
Summary We develop sample size formulas for studies aiming to test mean differences between a treatment and control group when all-or-none nonadherence (noncompliance) and selection bias are expected. Recent work by Fay, Halloran, and Follmann (2007, Biometrics63, 465,474) addressed the increased variances within groups defined by treatment assignment when nonadherence occurs, compared to the scenario of full adherence, under the assumption of no selection bias. In this article, we extend the authors' approach to allow selection bias in the form of systematic differences in means and variances among latent adherence subgroups. We illustrate the approach by performing sample size calculations to plan clinical trials with and without pilot adherence data. Sample size formulas and tests for normally distributed outcomes are also developed in a Web Appendix that account for uncertainty of estimates from external or internal pilot data. [source]