2012
DOI: 10.1097/mlr.0b013e318249cb74
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measures of Adherence to Oral Hypoglycemic Agents at the Primary Care Clinic Level

Abstract: The variation in the proportion of patients adherent across clinics remained large after risk adjustment. As patient and facility effects explained only 4% of the variance in adherence, comparing clinics based on unadjusted scores is a reasonable starting point unless more predictive patient, provider, and facility factors are identified.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
22
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
1
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The final study sample included 280,603 diabetes patients who received care from 196 primary clinics for which data were also available from the primary care survey. These patients were a subset of a sample documented in a prior study [17]. …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The final study sample included 280,603 diabetes patients who received care from 196 primary clinics for which data were also available from the primary care survey. These patients were a subset of a sample documented in a prior study [17]. …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, if 140 of 200 patients in a clinic had 80% or greater adherence, then the clinic would have an adherence rate of 70%. To account for differences in patient characteristics across clinics that might influence clinic-level adherence scores, we risk adjusted clinic-level adherence scores using a hierarchical logistic regression model (see Wong, Piette et al [17] for more details). Specifically, the model first estimated adherence at the patient level adjusting for patient characteristics known to impact adherence such as race and the presence of comorbid depression.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although compelling anecdotes and personal experiences with “disobedient patients” are powerful influences to practicing health care professionals, these types of patients probably contribute only a small part to the overall problem of medication non-adherence 40. As a result, individual patient factors are known to contribute minimally (if at all) to the overall occurrence of non-adherence observed in population-based studies 42,43…”
Section: Predictors Of Non-adherencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Not only are individual factors weakly predictive on their own, multivariable models do not predict or explain more than a fraction of the massive burden of non-adherence observed in population studies 42,43. For example, Wong et al could explain less than 4% of all cases of non-adherence (measured from prescription refill databases) using available patient-level and clinic-level factors from administrative data sources among 444,418 patients with diabetes registered in the National Veterans Affairs database in the US 43.…”
Section: Predictors Of Non-adherencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a study of records from more than 56,000 veterans with type 2 diabetes taking OADs (years 2000–2002), 23% of patients were categorized as non-adherent, as defined by a medication possession ratio (MPR) <80% after 1 year [80]. A later re-evaluation of the VA database (years 2005–2007) demonstrated a somewhat higher rate of non-adherence (30%) using the 1-year MPR ( N  = 444,418) [81]. One study that reviewed the medical literature for data on adherence (years 2000–2005) reported similar results, showing that 42% of patients had a 1-year MPR <80% (35 studies) [82].…”
Section: Sustainability Of the Prescribed Regimenmentioning
confidence: 99%