Increasing the detection and response to adherence problems with cardiovascular medication in primary care through computerized drug management systems: a randomized controlled trial
Abstract
Background. Adherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy is poor, resulting in an almost 2-fold increase in hospitalization. Treatment side effects, cost, and complexity are common reasons for nonadherence, and physicians are often unaware of these potentially modifiable problems. Objective. To determine if a cardiovascular medication tracking and nonadherence alert system, incorporated into a computerized health record system, would increase drug profile review by primary care physicians, increase the likelihood of therapy change, and improve adherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering drugs. Methods. There were 2293 primary care patients prescribed lipid-lowering or antihypertensive drugs who were randomized to the adherence tracking and alert system or active medication list alone to determine if the intervention increased drug profile review, changes in cardiovascular drug treatment, and refill adherence in the first 6 months. An intention to treat analysis was conducted using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering within physician. Results. Overall, medication adherence was below 80% for 36.3% of patients using lipid-lowering drugs and 40.8% of patients using antihypertensives at the start of the trial. There was a significant increase in drug profile review in the intervention compared to the control group (44.5% v. 35.5%; P < 0.001), a nonsignificant increase in drug discontinuations due to side effects (2.3% v. 2.0%; P = 0.61), and a reduction in therapy increases (28.5% v. 29.1%; P = 0.86). There was no significant change in refill adherence after 6 months of follow-up. Conclusion. An adherence tracking and alert system increases drug review but not therapy changes or adherence in prevalent users of cardiovascular drug treatment. Targeting incident users where adverse treatment effects are more common and combining adherence tracking and alert tools with motivational interventions provided by multidisciplinary primary care teams may improve the effectiveness of the intervention.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Evaluations of CDS have not consistently demonstrated improved patient outcomes.
“Despite initial promise of success and widespread CDS implementations, evaluations of CDS have not consistently demonstrated improved patient outcomes.9–12”
From Clinician collaboration to improve clinical decision support: the Clickbusters initiative (2022) · cites this paper as [11]
Cites
A meta-analysis of the association between adherence to drug therapy and mortality
Simpson, S. H., Eurich, D. T., Majumdar, S. R., Padwal, R. S., Tsuyuki, R. T., Varney, J., & Johnson, J. A. (2006) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38875.675486.55 · Cited by 1,353 · cited 1× · see citing works
“While substantial benefits have accrued, the full benefits of drug treatment are compromised by problems in medication adherence.(3;4) Studies in the US, UK, and Canada have shown that only 40% to 55% of patients continue to use lipid-reducing therapy in the second year of treatment, even though 4 to 5 years of contin…”
BackgroundGrand challenges in chronic non-communicable diseases
Daar, A. S., Singer, P. A., Leah Persad, D., Pramming, S. K., Matthews, D. R., Beaglehole, R., Bernstein, A., Borysiewicz, L. K., Colagiuri, S., Ganguly, N., et al. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/450494a · Cited by 701 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Grundy, S. M., Stone, N. J., Bailey, A. L., Beam, C., Birtcher, K. K., Blumenthal, R. S., Braun, L. T., de Ferranti, S., Faiella-Tommasino, J., Forman, D. E., et al. (2019) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000625 · Cited by 6,185 · see citing works
Grundy, S. M., Stone, N. J., Bailey, A. L., Beam, C., Birtcher, K. K., Blumenthal, R. S., Braun, L. T., de Ferranti, S., Faiella-Tommasino, J., Forman, D. E., et al. (2019) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.003 · Cited by 2,691 · see citing works
Effect of Clinical Decision-Support Systems: A Systematic Review
Bright, T. J., Wong, A., Dhurjati, R., Bristow, E., Bastian, L., Coeytaux, R. R., Samsa, G., Hasselblad, V., Williams, J. W., Musty, M. D., et al. (2012) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-1-201207030-00450 · Cited by 1,200 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Medication adherence: emerging use of technology
Granger, B. B., & Bosworth, H. B. (2011) · Current Opinion in Cardiology · doi:10.1097/hco.0b013e328347c150 · Cited by 165 · see citing works
A framework for evaluating the appropriateness of clinical decision support alerts and responses
McCoy, A. B., Waitman, L. R., Lewis, J. B., Wright, J. A., Choma, D. P., Miller, R. A., & Peterson, J. F. (2012) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000185 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Zaugg, V., Korb-Savoldelli, V., Durieux, P., & Sabatier, B. (2018) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012042.pub2 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Clinician collaboration to improve clinical decision support: the Clickbusters initiative
McCoy, A. B., Russo, E. M., Johnson, K. B., Addison, B., Patel, N., Wanderer, J. P., Mize, D. E., Jackson, J. G., Reese, T. J., Littlejohn, S., et al. (2022) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocac027 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tamblyn, R., Reidel, K., Huang, A., Taylor, L., Winslade, N., Bartlett, G., Grad, R., Jacques, A., Dawes, M., Larochelle, P., & Pinsonneault, A.
- Affiliations
- McGill University (CA)
- College of Physicians of Quebec
- Université de Montréal (CA)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Medical Decision Making
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-08-12
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 176-188
- ISSN
- 0272-989X (ISSN-L)
- 1552-681X
- OpenAlex
- W2151481259
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 3.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Decision Making (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Keywords
- medication adherence, antihypertensive drugs, lipid-lowering drugs, electronic health records, medication review, primary care, treatment side effects, prescription refills, cardiovascular drugs
- MeSH terms
- Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antihypertensive Agents, Hypolipidemic Agents, Drug Utilization, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Physicians, Family, Sex Factors, Medical Records Systems, Computerized, Drug Monitoring, Reminder Systems
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