The relationship between directly measured statin adherence, self-reported adherence measures and cholesterol levels in patients with coronary heart disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We aimed to determine the relationship between statin adherence measured directly, and by self-report measures and serum cholesterol levels.

METHODS

Patients prescribed atorvastatin (N = 373) participated in a cross-sectional study 2-36 months after a coronary event. Self-reported adherence included statin adherence the past week, the 8-item Morisky medication adherence scale (MMAS-8), and the Gehi et al. adherence question. Atorvastatin was measured directly in spot blood plasma by a novel liquid chromatography tandem mass-spectrometry method discriminating adherence (0-1 doses omitted) and reduced adherence (≥2 doses omitted). Participants were unaware of the atorvastatin analyses at study participation.

RESULTS

Mean age was 63 (SD 9) years and 8% had reduced atorvastatin adherence according to the direct method. In patients classified with reduced adherence by the direct method, 40% reported reduced statin adherence, 32% reported reduced adherence with the MMAS-8 and 22% with the Gehi question. In those adherent by the direct method, 96% also reported high statin adherence, 95% reported high adherence on the MMAS-8 whereas 94% reported high adherence on the Gehi question. Cohen's kappa agreement score with the direct method was 0.4 for self-reported statin adherence, 0.3 for the Gehi question and 0.2 for the MMAS-8. Adherence determined by the direct method, self-reported statin adherence last week, and the Gehi question was inversely related to LDL-cholesterol levels with a p-value of <0.001, 0.001 and 0.004, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Plasma-statin measurements reveal reduced adherence with higher sensitivity than self-report measures, relate to cholesterol levels, and may prove to be a useful tool to improve lipid management.

Persistence and adherence to nucleos(t)ide analogues in chronic hepatitis B: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Adherence and persistence to long-term therapy with nucleos(t)ides analogues are crucial to the outcome of treatment in chronic hepatitis B. Our aim was to determine the persistence and adherence rates to nucleos(t)ides analogues in chronic hepatitis B patients under maintenance therapy and to identify relative to prediction of adherence factors.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed electronic prescription data of patients (2011-2016; n = 400) with chronic hepatitis B treated with nucleos(t)ides analogues at 4 tertiary liver centers in Greece.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-six of 400 patients were under or initiated treatment in 2011-2012 (existing patients), while the remainder initiated or switched medication from January 2013 and onward (new patients). The median adherence rate was 99%, with 89.7% achieving adherence >80% during a mean follow-up of 28 ± 14 months. The overall 12-month persistence rate was 57%, with no difference between patients receiving tenofovir, entecavir or double therapy (57.8%, 52.8% and 68.4%, respectively, P = 0.399). The decline in persistence was more pronounced during the first 3 months of follow-up and in existing patients (P = 0.057). Overall, 80% and 55.1% of nonpersistent patients succeeded adherence to nucleos(t)ides analogues >80% and >90%, respectively. Multivariate analyses showed that existing (vs. new) patients were less likely to have >80% adherence (odds ratio: 0.324, P = 0.44) and persistence (odds ratio: 0.562, P = 0.057) to nucleos(t)ides analogues therapy.

CONCLUSION

In this real-world cohort of chronic hepatitis B patients, high adherence to nucleos(t)ides analogues was coupled with suboptimal persistence with prescribing the medication. Our data indicate that persistence and adherence are distinct measures that should be approached separately in educational programs targeting to improve medication-taking behavior in chronic hepatitis B.

A systematic literature review comparing methods for the measurement of patient persistence and adherence

OBJECTIVES

A systematic literature review was conducted comparing different approaches estimating persistence and adherence in chronic diseases with polypharmacy of oral and subcutaneous treatments.

METHODS

This work followed published guidance on performing systematic reviews. Twelve electronic databases and grey literature sources were used to identify studies and guidelines for persistence and adherence of oral and subcutaneous therapies in hypercholesterolemia, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis. Outcomes of interest of each persistence and adherence data collection and calculation method included pros: accurate, easy to use, inexpensive; and cons: inaccurate, difficult to use, expensive.

RESULTS

A total of 4158 records were retrieved up to March 2017. We included 16 observational studies, 5 systematic reviews and 7 guidelines, in patients with hypercholesterolemia (n = 8), type 2 diabetes (n = 4), hypertension (n = 2), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 1) and mixed patient populations (n = 13). Pharmacy and medical records offer an accurate, easy and inexpensive data collection method. Pill count, medication event monitoring systems (MEMs), self-report questionnaires and observer report are easy to use. MEMS and biochemical monitoring tests can be expensive. Proportion of days covered (PDC) was recommended as a gold standard calculation method for long-term treatments. PDC avoids use of days' supply in calculation, hence is more accurate compared to medication possession ratio (MPR) to assess adherence to treatments in chronic diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

Decisions on what method to use should be based on considerations of the route of medication administration, the resources available, setting and aim of the assessment. Combining different methods may provide wider insights into adherence and persistence, including patient behavior.

Toward appropriate criteria in medication adherence assessment in older persons: Position Paper

Nonadherence to medication regimens is a worldwide challenge; adherence rates range from 38 to 57 % in older populations with an average rate of less than 45 % and nonadherence contributes to adverse drug events, increased emergency visits and hospitalisations. Accurate measurement of medication adherence is important in terms of both research and clinical practice. However, the identification of an objective approach to measure nonadherence is still an ongoing challenge. The aim of this Position Paper is to describe the advantages and disadvantages of the known medication adherence tools (self-report, pill count, medication event monitoring system (MEMS) and electronic monitoring devices, therapeutic drug monitoring, pharmacy records based on pharmacy refill and pharmacy claims databases) to provide the appropriate criteria to assess medication adherence in older persons. To the best of our knowledge, no gold standard has been identified in adherence measurement and no single method is sufficiently reliable and accurate. A combination of methods appears to be the most suitable. Secondly, adherence assessment should always consider tools enabling polypharmacy adherence assessment. Moreover, it is increasingly evident that adherence, as a process, has to be assessed over time and not just at one evaluation time point (drug discontinuation). When cognitive deficits or functional impairments may impair reliability of adherence assessment, a comprehensive geriatric assessment should be performed and the caregiver involved. Finally, studies considering the possible implementation in clinical practice of adherence assessment tools validated in research are needed.

A scoping review of studies comparing the medication event monitoring system (MEMS) with alternative methods for measuring medication adherence

Different methods are available for measuring medication adherence. In this paper, we conducted a scoping review to identify and summarize evidence of all studies comparing the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS) with alternative methods for measuring medication adherence. A literature search was performed using the open database www.iAdherence.org that includes all original studies reporting findings from the MEMS. Papers comparing methods for measuring adherence to solid oral formulations were included. Data was extracted using a standardized extraction table. A total of 117 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 251 comparisons. Most frequent comparisons were against self-report (n = 119) and pill count (n = 59). Similar outcome measures were used in 210 comparisons (84%), among which 78 used dichotomous variables (adherent or not) and 132 used continuous measures (adherence expressed as percentage). Furthermore, 32% of all comparisons did not estimate adherence over the same coverage period and 44% of all comparisons did not use a statistical method or used a suboptimal one. Only eighty-seven (35%) comparisons had similar coverage periods, similar outcome measures and optimal statistical methods. Compared to MEMS, median adherence was grossly overestimated by 17% using self-report, by 8% using pill count and by 6% using rating. In conclusion, among all comparisons of MEMS versus alternative methods for measuring adherence, only a few used adequate comparisons in terms of outcome measures, coverage periods and statistical method. Researchers should therefore use stronger methodological frameworks when comparing measurement methods and be aware that non-electronic measures could lead to overestimation of medication adherence.

Cost-related nonadherence to prescribed medication therapy among Medicare Part D beneficiaries with end-stage renal disease

PURPOSE

Medication nonadherence due to cost issues among community-dwelling patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) enrolled in Medicare prescription drug plans was evaluated.

METHODS

Demographic and health status data were collected on 1329 patients with ESRD enrolled in Medicare Part D prescription drug plans who responded to a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services consumer survey in early 2007. The survey data were assessed for self-reported cost-related nonadherence (CRN), defined as delaying or not filling a prescription due to cost concerns. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate CRN risk relative to patient demographic characteristics, socioeconomic status, other chronic conditions, health behaviors, and access to health care services.

RESULTS

Overall, survey respondents with ESRD were significantly more likely than those without ESRD to report CRN in the prior six months (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.00-2.75). After controlling for potential confounding factors such as other chronic conditions, the data analysis continued to show a significant association between ESRD and an increased risk of CRN (adjusted OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.07-1.41). Black race and receipt of Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy assistance were significant independent predictors of CRN for respondents with ESRD.

CONCLUSION

In early 2007, 31% of survey respondents with ESRD enrolled in Medicare Part D drug plans reported CRN in the preceding six months. After adjusting for potential confounders, respondents with ESRD remained 23% more likely than respondents without ESRD to report CRN in the preceding six months.

Persistence and adherence to nucleos(t)ide analogue treatment for chronic hepatitis B

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Long-term treatment with nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs) is associated with increasing rates of antiviral drug resistance. Medication adherence is important in preventing drug resistance. This study aimed to determine, first, the persistence rates and the adherence rates to NUCs in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), and second, the factors associated with adherence.

METHODS

Pharmacy claims of three cohorts of patients with CHB who were receiving lamivudine, adefovir, or entecavir in January 2007, January 2008, and January 2009, and data of patients receiving tenofovir in January 2009, were analyzed. Persistence was defined as continuing acquisition of pharmacy claims during a 12-month period and adherence as the percent of days in which patients had medication during the period in which the medication was prescribed.

RESULTS

A total of 11,100 patients were included, 4.7% were patients newly started on a NUC and 95.3% were existing patients already on a NUC at the start of each year. The mean ± SD persistence rate was 81 ± 3.8%, and was higher among existing patients than among new patients, 81.4% vs. 73.4% (p < 0.001). The mean ± SD adherence rate was 87.8 ± 19.1% and was higher among existing patients than among new patients, 88% vs. 84.6% (p = 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that new patients (OR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.86), those receiving lamivudine (OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.58-0.76), and young adult patients (OR=0.82, 95% CI 0.74-0.91) were less likely to have adherence rate > 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

Persistence and adherence to NUCs were high among CHB patients. Counseling of young and/or new patients on medication adherence may decrease the rate of antiviral drug resistance.

Experience with an Adherence Assessment Form

Background:

Nonadherence is so common that the majority of patients taking chronic medications will eventually stop their medication on their own. Pharmacists are in a position to intervene to improve adherence; however, many do not. Such intervention would ideally be accomplished in a total pharmaceutical care approach; however, many pharmacists feel they do not have the time for such interventions. We propose the use of an adherence assessment form which the patient would complete to save pharmacist time; the pharmacist could then react to issues identified in the form.

Purpose:

The objective of this study was to determine the acceptability of such a form to patients and to dispensary staff, and its potential for impact on adherence.

Methods:

The author recruited 2 regional groups of pharmacies with pharmacy interns/students, 4 in Hamilton and 15 in Edmonton. Patients presenting with new prescriptions were asked by the intern or the staff to participate via a consent form. Patients completed the adherence assessment form while they waited for their prescription. The pharmacist then intervened on adherence issues identified in the questionnaire. The patient completed a patient satisfaction survey. The pharmacist or the assistant was asked to complete a pharmacy satisfaction survey.

Results:

A total of 200 patients, 111 in Hamilton and 89 in Edmonton, completed the process. Analysis of patient responses revealed that most patients expect benefits from their medication and would like more information; 2/3 found that the assessment form led to an informative discussion; 1/3 found that it brought up issues they had not thought about; over half learned a lot about their new medication; and over half said that as a result of the dialogue, they will know what do about side effects; 1/5 said they would be more motivated about their health. Analysis from the pharmacies revealed that over half of the pharmacies believed the form improved comprehension of the medication regimen; over half believed it facilitated more consultation for patients; over half found greater satisfaction by patients for their services and 1/3 felt it frequently changed patient outcomes. Despite all this, 2/3 of pharmacies said that the form should not be routinely used, as it did not save pharmacists any time.

Conclusion:

It was concluded that the form was acceptable to patients and pharmacies and showed sufficient potential impact to warrant a study of its influence on adherence measures.

Lipid control and use of lipid-regulating drugs for prevention of cardiovascular events in Chinese type 2 diabetic patients: a prospective cohort study

Background

Dyslipidaemia is an important but modifiable risk factor of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in type 2 diabetes. Yet, the effectiveness of lipid regulating drugs in Asians is lacking. We examined the effects of lipid control and treatment with lipid regulating drugs on new onset of CVD in Chinese type 2 diabetic patients.

Methods

In this prospective cohort consisting of 4521 type 2 diabetic patients without history of CVD and naïve for lipid regulating treatment recruited consecutively from 1996 to 2005, 371 developed CVD after a median follow-up of 4.9 years. We used Cox proportional hazard regression to obtain the hazard ratios (HR) of lipids and use of lipid regulating drugs for risk of CVD.

Results

The multivariate-adjusted HR (95% confidence interval) of CVD in patients with high LDL-cholesterol (≥ 3.0 mmol/L) was 1.36 (1.08 - 1.71), compared with lower values. Using the whole range value of HDL-cholesterol, the risk of CVD was reduced by 41% with every 1 mmol/L increase in HDL-cholesterol. Plasma triglyceride did not predict CVD. Statins use was associated with lower CVD risk [HR = 0.66 (0.50 - 0.88)]. In sub-cohort analysis, statins use was associated with a HR of 0.60 (0.44 - 0.82) in patients with high LDL-cholesterol (≥ 3.0 mmol/L) and 0.49 (0.28 - 0.88) in patients with low HDL-cholesterol. In patients with LDL-cholesterol < 3.0 mmol/L, use of fibrate was associated with HR of 0.34 (0.12 - 1.00). Only statins were effective in reducing incident CVD in patients with metabolic syndrome [(HR = 0.58(0.42--0.80)].

Conclusions

In Chinese type 2 diabetic patients, high LDL-cholesterol and low HDL-cholesterol predicted incident CVD. Overall, patients treated with statins had 40-50% risk reduction in CVD compared to non-users.

A competing risks prescription refill model of compliance and persistence

OBJECTIVES

There is evidence to suggest that noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors have differing risk factors, clinical consequences, and responses to intervention. This has led to calls for these behaviors to be defined and measured separately to characterize medication-taking behavior comprehensively. Current prescription refill models of compliance are, however, unable to appropriately distinguish between noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors. To address this limitation, a prescription refill model of medication-taking behavior in which noncompliance and nonpersistence are treated as competing risks is presented.

METHODS

The proposed competing risks model of compliance and persistence is compared with a selection of widely applied prescription refill models of compliance and persistence using a common cohort of patients prescribed statin therapy.

RESULTS

The competing risks model allows the simultaneous measurement of noncompliance and nonpersistence, the partitioning of their individual contributions to medication-taking behavior, and the estimation of noncompliance risk for patients with varying treatment persistence. The results from this model provide information about the relative and overall contributions of noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors to medication-taking behavior. The methodology also allows an assessment of the differential influence of various risk factors on these behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed competing risks model differentiates between noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors using prescription refill data. Results from the model provide insights into the dynamics of noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors that have not been possible with current prescription refill methodologies.

Interventions to improve adherence to lipid lowering medication

BACKGROUND

Lipid lowering drugs are still widely underused, despite compelling evidence about their effectiveness in the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disease. Poor patient adherence to a medication regimen is a major factor in the lack of success in treating hyperlipidaemia. In this updated review we focus on interventions which encourage patients at risk of heart disease or stroke to take lipid lowering medication regularly.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions aimed at improved adherence to lipid lowering drugs, focusing on measures of adherence and clinical outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 1), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL (March 2008). No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of adherence-enhancing interventions for lipid lowering medication in adults for both primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in an ambulatory setting looking at adherence, serum lipid levels, adverse effects and health outcomes. Studies were selected independently by two review authors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted and assessed by two review authors following criteria outlined by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

Three additional studies were found in the update and, in total, 11 studies were included in this review. The studies included interventions that caused a change in adherence ranging from -3% to 25% (decrease in adherence by 3% to increase in adherence by 25%). Patient re-enforcement and reminding was the most promising category of interventions, investigated in six trials of which four showed improved adherent behaviour of statistical significance (absolute increase: 24%, 9%, 8% and 6%). Other interventions associated with increased adherence were simplification of the drug regimen (absolute increase 11%) and patient information and education (absolute increase 13%). The methodological and analytical quality of some studies was low and results have to be considered with caution.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At this stage, reminding patients seems the most promising intervention to increase adherence to lipid lowering drugs. The lack of a gold standard method of measuring adherence is one major barrier in adherence research. More reliable data might be achieved by newer methods of measurement, more consistency in adherence assessment and longer duration of follow up. More recent studies have started using more reliable methods for data collection but follow-up periods remain too short. Increased patient-centredness with emphasis on the patient's perspective and shared decision-making might lead to more conclusive answers when searching for tools to encourage patients to take lipid lowering medication.

Sustained effects in hypercholesterolaemic patients on combined simvastatin/ezetimibe treatment: observational cohort study in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

In order to reduce individual cardiovascular risk, many patients require life-long lipid-lowering therapy, often as a drug combination approach. We aimed to describe the usage pattern, effectiveness and tolerability of long-term treatment with lipid-lowering agents, with particular focus on an oral combination of simvastatin (SIM 10, 20, 40 or 80 mg) plus ezetimibe (EZ 10 mg).

METHODS

A prospective, observational study in 512 general practices throughout Germany. From a sample of patients at moderate or high cardiovascular risk who had previously taken part in a half-year study of an SIM/EZ combination, 5485 patients were documented after 1 year of treatment (mean 58 +/- 16 weeks) with regard to lipid parameters, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and adverse events.

RESULTS

At the start of follow-up, 78.6% of patients were still on the SIM/EZ combination. At the end of follow-up, mean low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients on the combination versus those on other lipid-lowering therapy was reduced by 29.3 vs. 17.6% compared with baseline, total cholesterol by 23.1 vs. 14.5%, mean high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) was increased by 15.9 vs. 13.4%, and mean triglycerides were reduced by 16.1 vs. 7.9%. Individual LDL-C targets were achieved by 56.6% on the SIM/EZ combination versus 35.9% on other therapy. In the long term (but not the short term), low acceptance of nutrition counselling as rated by the physician was associated with poor lipid levels. ADRs during follow-up occurred in 18 patients (0.3%; all cases non-serious), with seven cases of myalgia, and three cases each of nausea or arthralgia.

CONCLUSIONS

This observational study showed that long-term therapy with the SIM/EZ combination resulted in sustained beneficial effects on serum lipids and was well-tolerated. Compared to patients with therapy discontinuations or switches, those remaining on the combination had better outcomes regarding lipid status.

Sensitivity of Patient Outcomes to Pharmacist Interventions. Part III: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Hyperlipidemia Management

Background

Hyperlipidemia increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases, and control is pivotal ror preventing disease complications. Multidisciplinary interventions, including those performed by pharmacists, are important for improving patients’ outcomes.

Objective:

To quantify the impact of pharmacist interventions in enhancing patients’ outcomes.

Methods

TWO reviewers searched International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. 3rd Quarter, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (all from inception to July 2007) for pharmacist interventions in hyperlipidemia. Quality was assessed using the Downs-Black scale. Data extracted included the number of patients enrolled; study characteristics; intervention type; and pre- and postintervention measures for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, total cholesterol, adherence, and quality of life. A random effects meta-analysis combined data. Heterogeneity of effects was tested using χ5 analysis. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and the Begg-Mazumdar statistic.

Results:

Forty-eight studies were found; 23 met inclusion criteria. Study settings included medical clinic/center (n = 12), community pharmacy (n = 8), hospital (n = 2), and patient homes (n = 1). Article quality was good (71% ± 7.0%). Patient education (78%) and medication management (74%) were the most common interventions. Total cholesterol was significantly reduced from baseline (mean ± SD; 34.3 ± 10.3 mg/dL; p < 0.001) and above that for controls (22.0 ± 10.4 mg/dL: p = 0.034). LDL-C was reduced significantly from baseline (32.6 ± 11.3 mg/dL; p = 0.004), but not significantly more than controls (17.5 ± 10.9 mg/dL; p = 0.109). A clinically relevant but not statistically significant reduction in triglycerides was found. No impact on HDL-C levels was found. Patients’ adherence to pharmacotherapeutic regimens and quality of life were considered possibly not sensitive and possibly sensitive to pharmacist interventions, respectively.

Conclusions:

Total cholesterol is sensitive to pharmacist interventions, while LDL-C and triglyceride levels are possibly sensitive to those interventions. Further research is required for these outcomes.

Pharmionics in dermatology: a review of topical medication adherence

The objective of this article was to review patient adherence to topical medications and its relationship to health outcomes in dermatologic disease. To this end, MEDLINE searches from January 1966 through June 2006 and EMBASE searches from January 1974 through June 2006 were conducted. Relevant human efficacy studies, including randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and case-control studies, were selected on the basis of the key words 'compliance,' 'adherence,' 'pharmionics,' 'topical,' 'medication,' or 'dermatology.' Studies were included and reviewed on the basis of their experimental design, controls, and statistical analysis. Analysis revealed that suboptimal adherence to topical medications is a common cause of minimal response or lack of response to drugs and is linked with poor dermatologic outcomes in diseases such as psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, and acne. It is concluded that non-adherence to topical medications is as common as non-adherence to oral medications, and its relationship to poor health outcomes is clear. Several barriers to topical medication adherence and predictors of non-adherence are similar to those for oral medications, while other barriers and predictors are unique to topical medications and the nature of dermatologic disease. Further studies of effective interventions to increase adherence are necessary to improve health outcomes in dermatology.