The role of patient preferences in adherence to treatment in chronic disease: a narrative review
Open accessAbstract
Adherence to prescribed medication is important to the management of all diseases, especially those of chronic nature. Drug effectiveness is substantially compromised by therapy nonadherence. We reviewed the available evidences on the impact of patient preferences for therapy on adherence to a prescribed treatment in chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment. A search on PubMed retrieved 699 publications, leading to a selection of 12 publications: 6 on osteoporosis, 2 on moderate-to-severe asthma, 1 on type 1 diabetes, 1 on type 2 diabetes, 1 on kidney transplantation, and 1 on atrial fibrillation. Overall, 8 studies found a positive association between patient preference and adherence to therapy, while the others found no association. In general, overall adherence was considered to be high in the published studies. The reasons for a positive association included reduced dosing frequency, route of administration, lower costs, and favorable safety profile, which is related to the diverse nature of the pathology and its type and duration of treatment. A literature review suggests that achieving good adherence and persistence to therapy requires evaluation of patient preferences. In a period of increasingly limited resources, more effort is warranted to promote better adherence to therapy, especially when patients must self-manage their disease in the long term. Our results further highlight that insufficient attention has been given to the relationship between patient preference and adherence and point out the complex nature of adherence and the need for adequate patient education. More efforts are also needed to better understand the entity of cost savings for payers for specific treatments and the link with patient preference.
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
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.
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?
Literature suggests that aligning with patients' preferences of attributes in treatment modalities increases the likelihood of patients persisting on therapy.
“Literature suggests that aligning with patients’ preferences of attributes in treatment modalities increases the likelihood of patients persisting on therapy10,11.”
From Orforglipron for maintenance of body weight reduction: the double-blind, randomized phase 3b ATTAIN-MAINTAIN trial (2026) · cites this paper as [10]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803 · Cited by 2,550 · see citing works
Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade
Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006) · Journal of Chiropractic Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0899-3467(07)60142-6 · Cited by 2,224 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The methods, including the search strategy, were developed based on relevant literature (15-18).”
MethodDepression and Diabetes: Impact of Depressive Symptoms on Adherence, Function, and Costs
Ciechanowski, P. S., Katon, W. J., & Russo, J. E. (2000) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.160.21.3278 · Cited by 1,465 · see citing works
Ho, P. M., Rumsfeld, J. S., Masoudi, F. A., McClure, D. L., Plomondon, M. E., Steiner, J. F., & Magid, D. J. (2006) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.166.17.1836 · Cited by 1,135 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 32
- [1]Davies MJ D’Alessio DA Fradkin J et al. Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care. 2018 41 12 2669 2701 10.2337/dci18-0033 PubMed 30291106 PMC6245208 · DOI · Paper page
- [3]Haynes RB McDonald H Garg AX Montague P Interventions for helping patients to follow prescriptions for medications. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002 2 CD000011 PubMed 12076376
- [4]Egede LE Gebregziabher M Echols C Lynch CP Longitudinal effects of medication nonadherence on glycemic control. Ann Pharmacother. 2014 48 5 562 570 10.1177/1060028014526362 PubMed 24586059 · DOI · Paper page
- [5]Martin LR Williams SL Haskard KB Dimatteo MR The challenge of patient adherence. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2005 1 3 189 199 PubMed 18360559 PMC1661624
- [6]Cramer JA A systematic review of adherence with medications for diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004 27 5 1218 1224 10.2337/diacare.27.5.1218 PubMed 15111553 · DOI · Paper page
- [7]Ferdinand KC Yadav K Nasser SA et al. Disparities in hypertension and cardiovascular disease in blacks: the critical role of medication adherence. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017 19 10 1015 1024 10.1111/jch.13089 PubMed 28856834 PMC5638710 · DOI
- [9]Boye KS Curtis SE Lage MJ Garcia-Perez LE Associations between adherence and outcomes among older, type 2 diabetes patients: evidence from a Medicare Supplemental database. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016 10 1573 1581 10.2147/PPA.S107543 PubMed 27574406 PMC4993402 · DOI
- [10]Sokol MC McGuigan KA Verbrugge RR Epstein RS Impact of medication adherence on hospitalization risk and healthcare cost. Med Care. 2005 43 6 521 530 10.1097/01.mlr.0000163641.86870.af PubMed 15908846 · DOI · Paper page
- [11]Tiktin M Celik S Berard L Understanding adherence to medications in type 2 diabetes care and clinical trials to overcome barriers: a narrative review. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016 32 2 277 287 10.1185/03007995.2015.1119677 PubMed 26565758 · DOI
- [12]Gelhorn HL Sexton CC Classi PM Patient preferences for treatment of major depressive disorder and the impact on health outcomes: a systematic review. Prim Care Companion CNS Disord. 2011 13 5 PCC.11r01161 10.4088/PCC.11r01161 PubMed 22295273 PMC3267514 · DOI
- [13]Brazier JE Dixon S Ratcliffe J The role of patient preferences in cost-effectiveness analysis: a conflict of values? PharmacoEconomics. 2009 27 9 705 712 10.2165/11314840-000000000-00000 PubMed 19757864 · DOI
- [16]Ledade SD Jain SN Darji AA Gupta VH Narrative writing: effective ways and best practices. Perspect Clin Res. 2017 8 2 58 62 10.4103/2229-3485.203044 PubMed 28447014 PMC5384400 · DOI
- [17]Pautasso M Ten simple rules for writing a literature review. PLOS Comput Biol. 2013 9 7 e1003149 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149 PubMed 23874189 PMC3715443 · DOI
- [18]van Hoorn R Kievit W Booth A et al. The development of PubMed search strategies for patient preferences for treatment outcomes. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 16 1 88 10.1186/s12874-016-0192-5 PubMed 27473226 PMC4966584 · DOI
- [21]Kendler DL Macarios D Lillestol MJ et al. Influence of patient perceptions and preferences for osteoporosis medication on adherence behavior in the Denosumab Adherence Preference Satisfaction study. Menopause. 2014 21 1 25 32 10.1097/GME.0b013e31828f5e5d PubMed 23676636 · DOI
- [22]Kendler DL McClung MR Freemantle N et al; DAPS Investigators. Adherence, preference, and satisfaction of postmenopausal women taking denosumab or alendronate. Osteoporos Int. 2011 22 6 1725 1735 10.1007/s00198-010-1378-z PubMed 20827547 · DOI
- [23]Freemantle N Satram-Hoang S Tang ET et al; DAPS Investigators. Final results of the DAPS (Denosumab Adherence Preference Satisfaction) study: a 24-month, randomized, crossover comparison with alendronate in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int. 2012 23 1 317 326 10.1007/s00198-011-1780-1 PubMed 21927922 PMC3249211 · DOI
- [24]Jarab AS Mukattash TL Hilan H Medication non-adherence in patients with osteoporosis: implications for clinical pharmacists and osteoporosis care providers. Curr Clin Pharmacol. 2020 15 3 243 250 10.2174/1574884715666200116104754 PubMed 31951176 · DOI
- [25]Eliasaf A Amitai A Maram Edry M Yosselson Superstine S Rotman Pikielny P Compliance, persistence, and preferences regarding osteoporosis treatment during active therapy or drug holiday. J Clin Pharmacol. 2016 56 11 1416 1422 10.1002/jcph.738 PubMed 26999526 · DOI
- [26]Sakai A Ikeda S Okimoto N et al. Clinical efficacy and treatment persistence of monthly minodronate for osteoporotic patients unsatisfied with, and shifted from, daily or weekly bisphosphonates: the BP-MUSASHI study. Osteoporos Int. 2014 25 9 2245 2253 10.1007/s00198-014-2756-8 PubMed 24899103 PMC4134483 · DOI
- [27]Oral A Lorenc R FLINT-ACT Study Investigators. Compliance, persistence, and preference outcomes of postmenopausal osteoporotic women receiving a flexible or fixed regimen of daily risedronate: a multicenter, prospective, parallel group study. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2015 49 1 67 74 10.3944/AOTT.2015.14.0082 PubMed 25803256 · DOI
- [28]Thomasius F Keung Nip T Ivan P Phase IV randomized preference study in patients eligible for calcium and vitamin D supplementation. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016 32 10 1623 1631 10.1080/03007995.2016.1202817 PubMed 27322906 · DOI
- [29]Plaza V Giner J Calle M et al. Impact of patient satisfaction with his or her inhaler on adherence and asthma control. Allergy Asthma Proc. 2018 39 6 437 444 10.2500/aap.2018.39.4183 PubMed 30336791 PMC6212632 · DOI
- [30]Valero A Ribó P Maíz L et al. Asthma patient satisfaction with different dry powder inhalers. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2019 13 2 133 138 10.1080/17476348.2019.1567339 PubMed 30625015 · DOI
- [31]Al Hayek AA Al Dawish M Evaluating the user preference and level of insulin self-administration adherence in young patients with type 1 diabetes: experience with two insulin pen needle lengths. Cureus. 2020 12 6 e8673 10.7759/cureus.8673 PubMed 32699673 PMC7370678 · DOI
- [32]Ishii H Hayashino Y Akai Y Yabuta M Tsujii S Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors as preferable oral hypoglycemic agents in terms of treatment satisfaction: results from a multicenter, 12-week, open label, randomized controlled study in Japan (PREFERENCE 4 study). J Diabetes Investig. 2018 9 1 137 145 10.1111/jdi.12659 PubMed PMC5754532 28296349 · DOI
- [33]Wu S Xie S Xu Y et al. Persistence and outcomes of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. J Clin Nurs. 2019 28 9-10 1839 1846 10.1111/jocn.14797 PubMed 30667111 · DOI
- [34]Hugo C Weihprecht H Banas B et al. Renal function and patient-reported outcomes in stable kidney transplant patients following conversion from twice-daily immediate-release tacrolimus to once-daily prolonged-release tacrolimus: a 12-month observational study in routine clinical practice in Germany (ADAGIO). Transplant Proc. 2021 53 5 1484 1493 10.1016/j.transproceed.2021.01.034 PubMed 33610306 · DOI
- [35]Boye K Ross M Mody R Konig M Gelhorn H Patients’ preferences for once-daily oral versus once-weekly injectable diabetes medications: the REVISE study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2021 23 2 508 519 10.1111/dom.14244 PubMed 33140575 PMC7839441 · DOI
- [36]Weycker D Macarios D Edelsberg J Oster G Compliance with drug therapy for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2006 17 11 1645 1652 10.1007/s00198-006-0179-x PubMed 16862397 · DOI
- [38]Bruno G Picariello R Petrelli A et al. Direct costs in diabetic and non diabetic people: the population-based Turin study, Italy. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2012 22 8 684 690 10.1016/j.numecd.2011.04.007 PubMed 21907553 · DOI
- [39]Marchesini G Pasqualetti P Anichini R et al. Patient preferences for treatment in type 2 diabetes: the Italian discrete-choice experiment analysis. Acta Diabetol. 2019 56 3 289 299 10.1007/s00592-018-1236-6 PubMed 30306406 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Aronne, L. J., Horn, D. B., le Roux, C. W., Chao, A. M., Ho, W., Halpern, B., Griffin, R., Xie, C., Valderas, E. G., Lee, C. J., et al. (2026) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-026-04386-7 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
- Authors
- Losi, S., Berra, C. C. F., Fornengo, R., Pitocco, D., Biricolti, G., & Orsini Federici, M.
- Affiliations
- Eli Lilly (Italy) (IT)
- MultiMedica (IT)
- Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Losi, Serena
- Venue
- Drug Target Insights
- Publisher
- Aboutscience Srl
- Published
- 2021-11-08
- Volume
- 15
- Pages
- 13-20
- ISSN
- 1177-3928 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8591552
- OpenAlex
- W3211641877
- Cited by
- 85
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6
- FWCI
- 1.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Drug Target Insights (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
- Keywords
- patient preferences, medication adherence, chronic disease, osteoporosis, asthma, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, kidney transplantation, atrial fibrillation, dosing frequency, route of administration, drug costs, drug safety, patient education, self-management
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