The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Identification and Assessment of Adherence-Enhancing Interventions in Studies Assessing Medication Adherence Through Electronically Compiled Drug Dosing Histories: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to medications is prevalent across all medical conditions that include ambulatory pharmacotherapy and is thus a major barrier to achieving the benefits of otherwise effective medicines. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to identify and to compare the efficacy of strategies and components thereof that improve implementation of the prescribed drug dosing regimen and maintain long-term persistence, based on quantitative evaluation of effect sizes across the aggregated trials. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials that tested the efficacy of adherence-enhancing strategies with self-administered medications. The searches were limited to papers in the English language and were included from database inception to 31 December 2011. STUDY SELECTION: Our review included randomized controlled trials in which adherence was assessed by electronically compiled drug dosing histories. Five thousand four hundred studies were screened. Eligibility assessment was performed independently by two reviewers. A structured data collection sheet was developed to extract data from each study. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The adherence-enhancing components were classified in eight categories. Quality of the papers was assessed using the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines to assess potential bias. A combined adherence outcome was derived from the different adherence variables available in the studies by extracting from each paper the available adherence summary variables in a pre-defined order (correct dosing, taking adherence, timing adherence, percentage of adherent patients). To study the association between the adherence-enhancing components and their effect on adherence, a linear meta-regression model, based on mean adherence point estimates, and a meta-analysis were conducted. RESULTS: Seventy-nine clinical trials published between 1995 and December 2011 were included in the review. Patients randomized to an intervention group had an average combined adherence outcome of 74.3 %, which was 14.1 % higher than in patients randomized to the control group (60.2 %). The linear meta-regression analysis with stepwise variable selection estimated an 8.8 % increase in adherence when the intervention included feedback to the patients of their recent dosing history (EM-feedback) (p < 0.01) and a 5.0 % increase in adherence when the intervention included a cognitive-educational component (p = 0.02). In addition, the effect of interventions on adherence decreased by 1.1 % each month. Sensitivity analysis by selecting only high-quality papers confirmed the robustness of the model. The random effects model in the meta-analysis, conducted on 48 studies, confirmed the above findings and showed that the improvement in adherence was 19.8 % (95 % CI 10.7-28.9 %) among patients receiving EM-feedback, almost double the improvement in adherence for studies that did not include this type of feedback [10.3 % (95 % CI 7.5-13.1 %)] (p < 0.01). The improvement in adherence was 16.1 % (95 % CI 10.7-21.6 %) in studies that tested cognitive-educational components versus 10.1 % (95 % CI 6.6-13.6 %) in studies that did not include this type of intervention (p = 0.04). Among 57 studies measuring clinical outcomes, only 8 reported a significant improvement in clinical outcome. LIMITATIONS: Despite a common measurement, the meta-analysis was limited by the heterogeneity of the pooled data and the different measures of medication adherence. The funnel plot showed a possible publication bias in studies with high variability of the intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the statistical heterogeneity among the studies identified, and potential publication bias, the evidence from our meta-analysis suggests that EM-feedback and cognitive-educational interventions are potentially effective approaches to enhance patient adherence to medications. The limitations of this research highlight the urgent need to define guidelines and study characteristics for research protocols that can guide researchers in designing studies to assess the effects of adherence-enhancing interventions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136 · Cited by 10,349
Osterberg, L., & Blaschke, T. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra050100 · Cited by 7,974
The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis
(2019) · doi:10.7758/9781610448864 · Cited by 4,553
Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis
Sterne, J. A. C., & Egger, M. (2001) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00377-8 · Cited by 3,779
Interventions for enhancing medication adherence
Nieuwlaat, R., Wilczynski, N., Navarro, T., Hobson, N., Jeffery, R., Keepanasseril, A., Agoritsas, T., Mistry, N., Iorio, A., Jack, S., et al. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000011.pub4 · Cited by 2,945
Bias and Efficiency of Meta-Analytic Variance Estimators in the Random-Effects Model
Viechtbauer, W. (2005) · Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics · doi:10.3102/10769986030003261 · Cited by 1,699 · cited 1×
“First, the amount of residual/heterogeneity (s(2)) was estimated by random effects model using restricted maximum-likelihood method [24, 25].”
MethodInterventions for enhancing medication adherence
Haynes, R. B., Ackloo, E., Sahota, N., McDonald, H. P., & Yao, X. (2008) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000011.pub3 · Cited by 1,244
Interventions to Enhance Patient Adherence to Medication Prescriptions: Scientific Review
McDonald, H. P., Garg, A. X., & Haynes, R. B. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.22.2868 · Cited by 1,176
Pop-Eleches, C., Thirumurthy, H., Habyarimana, J. P., Zivin, J. G., Goldstein, M. P., de Walque, D., MacKeen, L., Haberer, J., Kimaiyo, S., Sidle, J., et al. (2011) · AIDS · doi:10.1097/qad.0b013e32834380c1 · Cited by 982
Interventions to Enhance Medication Adherence in Chronic Medical Conditions: A Systematic Review
Kripalani, S., Yao, X., & Haynes, R. B. (2007) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.167.6.540 · Cited by 810
Viswanathan, M., Golin, C. E., Jones, C. D., Ashok, M., Blalock, S. J., Wines, R. C. M., Coker-Schwimmer, E. J. L., Rosen, D. L., Sista, P., & Lohr, K. N. (2012) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-11-201212040-00538 · Cited by 754
Osborn, R. L., Demoncada, A. C., & Feuerstein, M. (2006) · The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine · doi:10.2190/eufn-rv1k-y3tr-fk0l · Cited by 621
Better compliance to antihypertensive medications reduces cardiovascular risk
Corrao, G., Parodi, A., Nicotra, F., Zambon, A., Merlino, L., Cesana, G., & Mancia, G. (2011) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0b013e328342ca97 · Cited by 367
de Bruin, M. (2010) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2009.536 · Cited by 181
Hou, M. Y., Hurwitz, S., Kavanagh, E., Fortin, J., & Goldberg, A. B. (2010) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e3181eb6b0f · Cited by 176
Simoni, J. M., Huh, D., Frick, P. A., Pearson, C. R., Andrasik, M. P., Dunbar, P. J., & Hooton, T. M. (2009) · JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes · doi:10.1097/qai.0b013e3181b9300c · Cited by 174 · cited 1×
“However, 5 [28–32] of the 79 studies were 3-arm or 4-arm studies testing the efficacy of more than one adherence-enhancing component, each compared with the same control group.”
BackgroundA medication self-management program to improve adherence to HIV therapy regimens
Smith, S. R., Rublein, J. C., Marcus, C., Brock, T. P., & Chesney, M. A. (2003) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/s0738-3991(02)00127-1 · Cited by 123
Compliance and Antihypertensive Efficacy of Amlodipine Compared With Nifedipine Slow-Release
Mounier-Vehier, C. (1998) · American Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1016/s0895-7061(97)00485-8 · Cited by 37
Cited by
2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes
Knuuti, J., Wijns, W., Saraste, A., Capodanno, D., Barbato, E., Funck-Brentano, C., Prescott, E., Storey, R. F., Deaton, C., Cuisset, T., et al. (2020) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz425 · Cited by 7,166
Interventions for enhancing medication adherence
Nieuwlaat, R., Wilczynski, N., Navarro, T., Hobson, N., Jeffery, R., Keepanasseril, A., Agoritsas, T., Mistry, N., Iorio, A., Jack, S., et al. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000011.pub4 · Cited by 2,945
Polonsky, W., & Henry, R. (2016) · Patient Preference and Adherence · doi:10.2147/ppa.s106821 · Cited by 784
Medication adherence outcomes of 771 intervention trials: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Conn, V. S., & Ruppar, T. M. (2017) · Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.03.008 · Cited by 367
“This study confirmed publication bias reported in other reviews (Demonceau et al., 2013).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citationESPACOMP Medication Adherence Reporting Guideline (EMERGE)
De Geest, S., Zullig, L. L., Dunbar-Jacob, J., Helmy, R., Hughes, D. A., Wilson, I. B., & Vrijens, B. (2018) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m18-0543 · Cited by 360
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- for the ABC project team, Demonceau, J., Ruppar, T., Kristanto, P., Hughes, D. A., Fargher, E., Kardas, P., De Geest, S., Dobbels, F., Lewek, P., Urquhart, J., & Vrijens, B.
- Venue
- Drugs
- Published
- 2013-04-16
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 545-562
- ISSN
- 0012-6667 (ISSN-L)
- 1179-1950
- OpenAlex
- W2102585440
- Cited by
- 307
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 4.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.