A Systematic Review of Medication Adherence Thresholds Dependent of Clinical Outcomes

Background: In pharmacotherapy, the achievement of a target clinical outcome requires a certain level of medication intake or adherence. Based on Haynes's early empirical definition of sufficient adherence to antihypertensive medications as taking ≥80% of medication, many researchers used this...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pascal C. Baumgartner, R. Brian Haynes, Kurt E. Hersberger, Isabelle Arnet
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-11-01
Series:Frontiers in Pharmacology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphar.2018.01290/full
id doaj-660179e966c346f699ed49fa2257d35e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-660179e966c346f699ed49fa2257d35e2020-11-24T21:46:37ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Pharmacology1663-98122018-11-01910.3389/fphar.2018.01290416764A Systematic Review of Medication Adherence Thresholds Dependent of Clinical OutcomesPascal C. Baumgartner0R. Brian Haynes1Kurt E. Hersberger2Isabelle Arnet3Pharmaceutical Care Research Group, University of Basel, Basel, SwitzerlandDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, CanadaPharmaceutical Care Research Group, University of Basel, Basel, SwitzerlandPharmaceutical Care Research Group, University of Basel, Basel, SwitzerlandBackground: In pharmacotherapy, the achievement of a target clinical outcome requires a certain level of medication intake or adherence. Based on Haynes's early empirical definition of sufficient adherence to antihypertensive medications as taking ≥80% of medication, many researchers used this threshold to distinguish adherent from non-adherent patients. However, we propose that different diseases, medications and patient's characteristics influence the cut-off point of the adherence rate above which the clinical outcome is satisfactory (thereafter medication adherence threshold). Moreover, the assessment of adherence and clinical outcomes may differ greatly and should be taken into consideration. To our knowledge, very few studies have defined adherence rates linked to clinical outcomes. We aimed at investigating medication adherence thresholds in relation to clinical outcomes.Method: We searched for studies that determined the relationship between adherence rates and clinical outcomes in the databases PubMed, EmbaseⓇ and Web of Science™ until December 2017, limited to English-language. Our outcome measure was any threshold value of adherence. The inclusion criteria of the retrieved studies were (1) any measurement of medication adherence, (2) any assessment of clinical outcomes, and (3) any method to define medication adherence thresholds in relation to clinical outcomes. We excluded articles considered as a tutorial. Two authors (PB and IA) independently screened titles and abstracts for relevance, reviewed full-texts, and extracted items. The results of the included studies are presented qualitatively.Result: We analyzed 6 articles that assessed clinical outcomes linked to adherence rates in 7 chronic disease states. Medication adherence was measured with Medication Possession Ratio (MPR, n = 3), Proportion of Days Covered (PDC, n = 1), both (n = 1), or Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS). Clinical outcomes were event free episodes, hospitalization, cortisone use, reported symptoms and reduction of lipid levels. To find the relationship between the targeted clinical outcome and adherence rates, three studies applied logistic regression and three used survival analysis. Five studies defined adherence thresholds between 46 and 92%. One study confirmed the 80% threshold as valid to distinguish adherent from non-adherent patients.Conclusion: The analyzed studies were highly heterogeneous, predominantly concerning methods of calculating adherence. We could not compare studies quantitatively, mostly because adherence rates could not be standardized. Therefore, we cannot reject or confirm the validity of the historical 80% threshold. Nevertheless, the 80% threshold was clearly questioned as a general standard.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphar.2018.01290/fullmedication adherence (MeSH)patient compliancethresholdsystematic (literature) reviewclinical outcomeadherence measurement methods
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Pascal C. Baumgartner
R. Brian Haynes
Kurt E. Hersberger
Isabelle Arnet
spellingShingle Pascal C. Baumgartner
R. Brian Haynes
Kurt E. Hersberger
Isabelle Arnet
A Systematic Review of Medication Adherence Thresholds Dependent of Clinical Outcomes
Frontiers in Pharmacology
medication adherence (MeSH)
patient compliance
threshold
systematic (literature) review
clinical outcome
adherence measurement methods
author_facet Pascal C. Baumgartner
R. Brian Haynes
Kurt E. Hersberger
Isabelle Arnet
author_sort Pascal C. Baumgartner
title A Systematic Review of Medication Adherence Thresholds Dependent of Clinical Outcomes
title_short A Systematic Review of Medication Adherence Thresholds Dependent of Clinical Outcomes
title_full A Systematic Review of Medication Adherence Thresholds Dependent of Clinical Outcomes
title_fullStr A Systematic Review of Medication Adherence Thresholds Dependent of Clinical Outcomes
title_full_unstemmed A Systematic Review of Medication Adherence Thresholds Dependent of Clinical Outcomes
title_sort systematic review of medication adherence thresholds dependent of clinical outcomes
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Pharmacology
issn 1663-9812
publishDate 2018-11-01
description Background: In pharmacotherapy, the achievement of a target clinical outcome requires a certain level of medication intake or adherence. Based on Haynes's early empirical definition of sufficient adherence to antihypertensive medications as taking ≥80% of medication, many researchers used this threshold to distinguish adherent from non-adherent patients. However, we propose that different diseases, medications and patient's characteristics influence the cut-off point of the adherence rate above which the clinical outcome is satisfactory (thereafter medication adherence threshold). Moreover, the assessment of adherence and clinical outcomes may differ greatly and should be taken into consideration. To our knowledge, very few studies have defined adherence rates linked to clinical outcomes. We aimed at investigating medication adherence thresholds in relation to clinical outcomes.Method: We searched for studies that determined the relationship between adherence rates and clinical outcomes in the databases PubMed, EmbaseⓇ and Web of Science™ until December 2017, limited to English-language. Our outcome measure was any threshold value of adherence. The inclusion criteria of the retrieved studies were (1) any measurement of medication adherence, (2) any assessment of clinical outcomes, and (3) any method to define medication adherence thresholds in relation to clinical outcomes. We excluded articles considered as a tutorial. Two authors (PB and IA) independently screened titles and abstracts for relevance, reviewed full-texts, and extracted items. The results of the included studies are presented qualitatively.Result: We analyzed 6 articles that assessed clinical outcomes linked to adherence rates in 7 chronic disease states. Medication adherence was measured with Medication Possession Ratio (MPR, n = 3), Proportion of Days Covered (PDC, n = 1), both (n = 1), or Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS). Clinical outcomes were event free episodes, hospitalization, cortisone use, reported symptoms and reduction of lipid levels. To find the relationship between the targeted clinical outcome and adherence rates, three studies applied logistic regression and three used survival analysis. Five studies defined adherence thresholds between 46 and 92%. One study confirmed the 80% threshold as valid to distinguish adherent from non-adherent patients.Conclusion: The analyzed studies were highly heterogeneous, predominantly concerning methods of calculating adherence. We could not compare studies quantitatively, mostly because adherence rates could not be standardized. Therefore, we cannot reject or confirm the validity of the historical 80% threshold. Nevertheless, the 80% threshold was clearly questioned as a general standard.
topic medication adherence (MeSH)
patient compliance
threshold
systematic (literature) review
clinical outcome
adherence measurement methods
url https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphar.2018.01290/full
work_keys_str_mv AT pascalcbaumgartner asystematicreviewofmedicationadherencethresholdsdependentofclinicaloutcomes
AT rbrianhaynes asystematicreviewofmedicationadherencethresholdsdependentofclinicaloutcomes
AT kurtehersberger asystematicreviewofmedicationadherencethresholdsdependentofclinicaloutcomes
AT isabellearnet asystematicreviewofmedicationadherencethresholdsdependentofclinicaloutcomes
AT pascalcbaumgartner systematicreviewofmedicationadherencethresholdsdependentofclinicaloutcomes
AT rbrianhaynes systematicreviewofmedicationadherencethresholdsdependentofclinicaloutcomes
AT kurtehersberger systematicreviewofmedicationadherencethresholdsdependentofclinicaloutcomes
AT isabellearnet systematicreviewofmedicationadherencethresholdsdependentofclinicaloutcomes
_version_ 1725901085718085632