2022
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.16472
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predictors of long‐term medication adherence in stroke survivors: A multicentre, prospective, longitudinal study

Abstract: Background: Although the optimal use of prescribed medications for stroke survivors is critical for preventing secondary stroke, longitudinal observations of the natural course of medication persistence and adherence in Korean stroke survivors are rare.Furthermore, studies are needed to identify strong predictors influencing medication adherence and to determine whether these predictors change over time.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
1
1

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
3
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This study confirmed that medication belief was significantly associated with adherence. Specifically, necessity belief is positively linked to medication adherence, while concern belief has the opposite effect, which was consistent with other published studies reporting that a strong medication belief had a positive impact on medication adherence ( Chua et al, 2018 ; Yoo et al, 2023 ). The overall score of medication belief was greater than “zero”, indicating that patients perceived more benefits than risks of oral anticoagulants.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…This study confirmed that medication belief was significantly associated with adherence. Specifically, necessity belief is positively linked to medication adherence, while concern belief has the opposite effect, which was consistent with other published studies reporting that a strong medication belief had a positive impact on medication adherence ( Chua et al, 2018 ; Yoo et al, 2023 ). The overall score of medication belief was greater than “zero”, indicating that patients perceived more benefits than risks of oral anticoagulants.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Considering that a significantly higher proportion of respondents were disabled (2.8% vs. 0.0%) and consumed more than two medications (76.4% vs. 32.0%), as well as a lower proportion of normal workers (9.7% vs. 20.8%) in the PSD group, we speculate that this counterintuitive result might be mainly due to the stronger belief in taking medicine in the PSD population, which is inspired by an intensive willingness to alleviate pain due to severe post-stroke complications, including dysphagia. Strong medication beliefs, as suggested by recent studies [41][42][43], are strongly associated with medication adherence in stroke patients, partly supporting our inference. Additionally, we corroborated the findings of other related studies on the positive correlation of old age and male sex with medication compliance in stroke patients [42][43][44], further enhancing the credibility of our study on the counterintuitive results discussed above.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Strong medication beliefs, as suggested by recent studies [41][42][43], are strongly associated with medication adherence in stroke patients, partly supporting our inference. Additionally, we corroborated the findings of other related studies on the positive correlation of old age and male sex with medication compliance in stroke patients [42][43][44], further enhancing the credibility of our study on the counterintuitive results discussed above.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…The 3-months medication adherence in these 2 groups was higher than that of previous studies [9,36]. However, it is still lower than the 89.0% medication adherence reported in a study of 600 patients conducted in 3 stroke centers across Korea [37]. Only patients who continued to take all prescribed medications were further evaluated for adherence, resulting in the exclusion of patients who reported discontinuing all or some medications, which may explain this difference.…”
Section: Principal Findingscontrasting
confidence: 56%