Literature DB >> 17587092

Adherence to warfarin assessed by electronic pill caps, clinician assessment, and patient reports: results from the IN-RANGE study.

Catherine S Parker1, Zhen Chen, Maureen Price, Robert Gross, Joshua P Metlay, Jason D Christie, Colleen M Brensinger, Craig W Newcomb, Frederick F Samaha, Stephen E Kimmel.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient adherence to warfarin may influence anticoagulation control; yet, adherence among warfarin users has not been rigorously studied.
OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to quantify warfarin adherence over time and to compare electronic medication event monitoring systems (MEMS) cap measurements with both self-report and clinician assessment of patient adherence.
DESIGN: We performed a prospective cohort study of warfarin users at 3 Pennsylvania-based anticoagulation clinics and assessed pill-taking behaviors using MEMS caps, patient reports, and clinician assessments.
RESULTS: Among 145 participants, the mean percent of days of nonadherence by MEMS was 21.8% (standard deviation+/-21.1%). Participants were about 6 times more likely to take too few pills than to take extra pills (18.8 vs. 3.3%). Adherence changed over time, initially worsening over the first 6 months of monitoring, which was followed by improvement beyond 6 months. Although clinicians were statistically better than chance at correctly labeling a participant's adherence (odds ratio = 2.05, p = 0.015), their estimates often did not correlate with MEMS-cap data; clinicians judged participants to be "adherent" at 82.8% of visits that were categorized as moderately nonadherent using MEMS-cap data (>or=20% nonadherence days). Similarly, at visits when participants were moderately nonadherent by MEMS, they self-reported perfect adherence 77.9% of the time.
CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that patients may benefit from adherence counseling even when they claim to be taking their warfarin or the clinician feels they are doing so, particularly several months into their course of therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17587092      PMCID: PMC2219760          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-007-0233-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  19 in total

Review 1.  The electronic medication event monitor. Lessons for pharmacotherapy.

Authors:  J Urquhart
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 6.447

2.  How often is medication taken as prescribed? A novel assessment technique.

Authors:  J A Cramer; R H Mattson; M L Prevey; R D Scheyer; V L Ouellette
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1989-06-09       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Time to stop counting the tablets?

Authors:  T Pullar; S Kumar; H Tindall; M Feely
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1989-08       Impact factor: 6.875

4.  Compliance and stability of INR of two oral anticoagulants with different half-lives: a randomised trial.

Authors:  Silvy Laporte; Sara Quenet; Andréa Buchmüller-Cordier; Jacqueline Reynaud; Brigitte Tardy-Poncet; Christine Thirion; Hervé Decousus; Patrick Mismetti
Journal:  Thromb Haemost       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 5.249

5.  Compliance with anticoagulant drug therapy: a study on patients with prosthetic heart valves.

Authors:  A F Howard; D B Frewin; P P Leonello; W B Taylor
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  1981-09-19       Impact factor: 7.738

Review 6.  Consensus guidelines for coordinated outpatient oral anticoagulation therapy management. Anticoagulation Guidelines Task Force.

Authors:  J E Ansell; M L Buttaro; O V Thomas; C H Knowlton
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 3.154

7.  Bleeding complications of oral anticoagulant treatment: an inception-cohort, prospective collaborative study (ISCOAT). Italian Study on Complications of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy.

Authors:  G Palareti; N Leali; S Coccheri; M Poggi; C Manotti; A D'Angelo; V Pengo; N Erba; M Moia; N Ciavarella; G Devoto; M Berrettini; S Musolesi
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-08-17       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Physicians' attitudes toward oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents for stroke prevention in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  M Kutner; G Nixon; F Silverstone
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1991-10

9.  Comparing the quality of oral anticoagulant management by anticoagulation clinics and by family physicians: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  S Jo-Anne Wilson; Philip S Wells; Michael J Kovacs; Geoffrey M Lewis; Janet Martin; Erica Burton; David R Anderson
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-08-19       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 10.  Role of patient compliance in clinical pharmacokinetics. A review of recent research.

Authors:  J Urquhart
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 6.447

View more
  35 in total

Review 1.  Concordance of adherence measurement using self-reported adherence questionnaires and medication monitoring devices.

Authors:  Lizheng Shi; Jinan Liu; Yordanka Koleva; Vivian Fonseca; Anupama Kalsekar; Manjiri Pawaskar
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Factors Affecting Patients' Perception On, and Adherence To, Anticoagulant Therapy: Anticipating the Role of Direct Oral Anticoagulants.

Authors:  Ekta Y Pandya; Beata Bajorek
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Randomized trial of lottery-based incentives to improve warfarin adherence.

Authors:  Stephen E Kimmel; Andrea B Troxel; George Loewenstein; Colleen M Brensinger; Jane Jaskowiak; Jalpa A Doshi; Mitchell Laskin; Kevin Volpp
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.749

4.  A pharmacometric case study regarding the sensitivity of structural model parameter estimation to error in patient reported dosing times.

Authors:  Jonathan Knights; Shashank Rohatagi
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2015-07-26       Impact factor: 2.745

5.  Comparison of two methods for collecting antibiotic use data on small dairy farms.

Authors:  L E Redding; F Cubas-Delgado; M D Sammel; G Smith; D T Galligan; M Z Levy; S Hennessy
Journal:  Prev Vet Med       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 2.670

6.  Can we predict daily adherence to warfarin?: Results from the International Normalized Ratio Adherence and Genetics (IN-RANGE) Study.

Authors:  Alec B Platt; A Russell Localio; Colleen M Brensinger; Dean G Cruess; Jason D Christie; Robert Gross; Catherine S Parker; Maureen Price; Joshua P Metlay; Abigail Cohen; Craig W Newcomb; Brian L Strom; Mitchell S Laskin; Stephen E Kimmel
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 7.  Frequency of monitoring, non-adherence, and other topics dear to an anticoagulation clinic provider.

Authors:  Nathan P Clark
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 8.  A biological global positioning system: considerations for tracking stem cell behaviors in the whole body.

Authors:  Shengwen Calvin Li; Lisa May Ling Tachiki; Jane Luo; Brent A Dethlefs; Zhongping Chen; William G Loudon
Journal:  Stem Cell Rev Rep       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 5.739

9.  Predicting prolonged dose titration in patients starting warfarin.

Authors:  Brian S Finkelman; Benjamin French; Luanne Bershaw; Colleen M Brensinger; Michael B Streiff; Andrew E Epstein; Stephen E Kimmel
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2016-07-26       Impact factor: 2.890

10.  Risk factors for nonadherence to warfarin: results from the IN-RANGE study.

Authors:  Alec B Platt; A Russell Localio; Colleen M Brensinger; Dean G Cruess; Jason D Christie; Robert Gross; Catherine S Parker; Maureen Price; Joshua P Metlay; Abigail Cohen; Craig W Newcomb; Brian L Strom; Mitchell S Laskin; Stephen E Kimmel
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.890

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.