Suppr超能文献

一项系统评价发现,用于估计多种心血管代谢药物的依从性和持久性的措施存在不一致性。

A systematic review finds inconsistency in the measures used to estimate adherence and persistence to multiple cardiometabolic medications.

机构信息

Unit PharmacoTherapy, -Epidemiology and -Economics, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang, Indonesia.

Unit PharmacoTherapy, -Epidemiology and -Economics, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Sumedang, Indonesia.

出版信息

J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Apr;108:44-53. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.12.003. Epub 2018 Dec 8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

We reviewed measures used to estimate adherence and persistence to multiple cardiometabolic medications from prescription data, particularly for blood pressure-lowering, lipid-lowering, and/or glucose-lowering medication, and give guidance on which measures to choose.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A literature search of Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO databases was conducted to identify studies assessing medication adherence and/or persistence for patients using multiple cardiometabolic medications. Two reviewers performed the study selection process independently.

RESULTS

From the 54 studies assessing adherence, only 36 (67%) clearly described the measures used. Five measures for adherence were identified, including adherence to "all," to "any," to "both" medication, "average adherence," and "highest/lowest adherence". From the 22 studies assessing persistence, only six (27%) clearly described the measures used. Three measures for persistence were identified, including persistence with "all," with "both," and with "any" medication. Less than half of the studies explicitly considered medication switches when relevant.

CONCLUSION

From the identified measures, the "any medication" measure is most suitable for identifying patients in need of an intervention, whereas the "all medication" measure is useful for assessing the effect of interventions. More attention is needed for adequate measurement definitions when reporting on and interpreting adherence or persistence estimates to multiple medications.

摘要

目的

我们回顾了从处方数据估算多种心血管代谢药物的依从性和持久性的方法,特别是针对降压、降脂和/或降糖药物,并就应选择哪些方法提供了指导。

研究设计和设置

对 Medline、Embase 和 PsycINFO 数据库进行了文献检索,以确定评估使用多种心血管代谢药物的患者药物依从性和/或持久性的研究。两名评审员独立进行了研究选择过程。

结果

在评估依从性的 54 项研究中,只有 36 项(67%)明确描述了所使用的方法。确定了 5 种依从性测量方法,包括对“所有”、“任何”、“两者”药物的依从性、“平均依从性”和“最高/最低依从性”。在评估持久性的 22 项研究中,只有 6 项(27%)明确描述了所使用的方法。确定了 3 种持久性测量方法,包括对“所有”、“两者”和“任何”药物的持久性。当相关时,不到一半的研究明确考虑了药物转换。

结论

在所确定的方法中,“任何药物”测量方法最适合识别需要干预的患者,而“所有药物”测量方法对于评估干预效果有用。在报告和解释对多种药物的依从性或持久性估计时,需要更加注意充分定义测量方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验