A new taxonomy for describing and defining adherence to medications

Adherence to escitalopram treatment in depression: a study of electronically compiled dosing histories in the 'Depression: the search for phenotypes' study

Poor adherence to depression treatment is common. Understanding determinants of poor adherence to therapy is crucial to ensure optimal clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to describe characteristics of dosing history in participants with depression receiving once daily escitalopram. Participants were randomly assigned to interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) or pharmacotherapy. Participants assigned to IPT who did not evidence a response or remission had escitalopram added to their treatment. Adherence to pharmacotherapy was assessed using an electronically monitored pill cap (MEMS). Fifty-four participants on escitalopram alone and 32 on escitalopram+IPT were monitored. After 200 days, 71.7% of the participants in the escitalopram group and 54.8% of those in the escitalopram+IPT group were still engaged with the dosing regimen. Of those engaged in the dosing regimen, 17.9% (average over 210 days) of the participants did not take their medication (nonexecution). In 69% of the days participants took the correct dosage required. On average, participants had three drug holidays and the mean length of a holiday was 7 days per patient. No difference in adherence patterns was observed between patients receiving escitalopram alone vs. IPT+escitalopram. Early discontinuation of treatment and suboptimal daily execution of the prescribed regimen are the most common facets of poor adherence in this study population.

Investigating factors associated with adherence behaviour in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: an observational patient-centered outcome study

Background:

Optimal adherence to imatinib therapy is of paramount importance to maximise treatment effectiveness in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML). The main objective of this study was to investigate patient-reported personal factors associated with adherence behaviour.

Methods:

Analysis was conducted on 413 CML patients receiving long-term therapy with imatinib. Adherence behaviour was measured with the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale and personal factors investigated included: quality of life, perceived social support, fatigue, symptom burden, psychological wellbeing and desire for additional information. Key socio-demographic and treatment-related factors were also taken into account. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to investigate factors associated with optimal adherence to therapy.

Results:

In all, 53% of patients reported an optimal adherence behaviour. The final multivariate model retained the following variables as independent predictors of optimal adherence to therapy: desire for more information (ref. no), odds ratio (OR)=0.43 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.29–0.66; P<0.001), social support (higher score representing greater support), OR=1.29 (95% CI, 1.11–1.49; P<0.001) and concomitant drug burden (ref. no), OR=1.82 (95% CI, 1.18–2.80; P=0.006).

Conclusion:

This study suggests that a higher level of social support, satisfaction with information received and concomitant drug burden are the main factors associated with greater adherence to long-term imatinib therapy.

Nonadherence to treatment protocol in published randomised controlled trials: a review

This review aimed to ascertain the extent to which nonadherence to treatment protocol is reported and addressed in a cohort of published analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). One hundred publications of RCTs, randomly selected from those published in BMJ, New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet during 2008, were reviewed to determine the extent and nature of reported nonadherence to treatment protocol, and whether statistical methods were used to examine the effect of such nonadherence on both benefit and harms analyses. We also assessed the quality of trial reporting of treatment protocol nonadherence and the quality of reporting of the statistical analysis methods used to investigate such nonadherence. Nonadherence to treatment protocol was reported in 98 of the 100 trials, but reporting on such nonadherence was often vague or incomplete. Forty-two publications did not state how many participants started their randomised treatment. Reporting of treatment initiation and completeness was judged to be inadequate in 64% of trials with short-term interventions and 89% of trials with long-term interventions. More than half (51) of the 98 trials with treatment protocol nonadherence implemented some statistical method to address this issue, most commonly based on per protocol analysis (46) but often labelled as intention to treat (ITT) or modified ITT (23 analyses in 22 trials). The composition of analysis sets for their benefit outcomes were not explained in 57% of trials, and 62% of trials that presented harms analyses did not define harms analysis populations. The majority of defined harms analysis populations (18 out of 26 trials, 69%) were based on actual treatment received, while the majority of trials with undefined harms analysis populations (31 out of 43 trials, 72%) appeared to analyse harms using the ITT approach. Adherence to randomised intervention is poorly considered in the reporting and analysis of published RCTs. The majority of trials are subject to various forms of nonadherence to treatment protocol, and though trialists deal with this nonadherence using a variety of statistical methods and analysis populations, they rarely consider the potential for bias introduced. There is a need for increased awareness of more appropriate causal methods to adjust for departures from treatment protocol, as well as guidance on the appropriate analysis population to use for harms outcomes in the presence of such nonadherence.