OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association and concordance of the new 8-item self-report Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS) with pharmacy fill data in a sample of community-dwelling seniors with hypertension. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Pharmacy records for antihypertensive medications were abstracted for 87 managed care adult patients with hypertension 65 years and older who completed a survey that included the MMAS. Continuous single-interval medication availability (CSA), medication possession ratio (MPR), and continuous multiple-interval medication gaps (CMG) were calculated using pharmacy data. The MMAS adherence was categorized as high, medium, and low (MMAS scores of 8, 6 to <8, and <6, respectively); pharmacy fill nonpersistence was defined as less than 0.8 for CSA and MPR and as greater than 0.2 for CMG. RESULTS: Overall, 58%, 33%, and 9% of participants had high, medium, and low medication adherence, respectively, by the MMAS. After adjustment for demographics and in comparison to high adherers on the MMAS, patients with low MMAS adherence were 6.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.48-19.10) times more likely to have nonpersistent pharmacy fill adherence by CSA and were 5.22 (95% CI, 1.88-14.50) times more likely to have nonpersistent pharmacy fill adherence by MPR. Concordance between the MMAS and CSA, MPR, and CMG was 75% or higher. CONCLUSIONS: The MMAS is significantly associated with antihypertensive drug pharmacy refill adherence. Although further validation of the MMAS is needed, it may be useful in identifying low medication adherers in clinical settings.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association and concordance of the new 8-item self-report Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS) with pharmacy fill data in a sample of community-dwelling seniors with hypertension. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Pharmacy records for antihypertensive medications were abstracted for 87 managed care adult patients with hypertension 65 years and older who completed a survey that included the MMAS. Continuous single-interval medication availability (CSA), medication possession ratio (MPR), and continuous multiple-interval medication gaps (CMG) were calculated using pharmacy data. The MMAS adherence was categorized as high, medium, and low (MMAS scores of 8, 6 to <8, and <6, respectively); pharmacy fill nonpersistence was defined as less than 0.8 for CSA and MPR and as greater than 0.2 for CMG. RESULTS: Overall, 58%, 33%, and 9% of participants had high, medium, and low medication adherence, respectively, by the MMAS. After adjustment for demographics and in comparison to high adherers on the MMAS, patients with low MMAS adherence were 6.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.48-19.10) times more likely to have nonpersistent pharmacy fill adherence by CSA and were 5.22 (95% CI, 1.88-14.50) times more likely to have nonpersistent pharmacy fill adherence by MPR. Concordance between the MMAS and CSA, MPR, and CMG was 75% or higher. CONCLUSIONS: The MMAS is significantly associated with antihypertensive drug pharmacy refill adherence. Although further validation of the MMAS is needed, it may be useful in identifying low medication adherers in clinical settings.
Authors: Michael Iskedjian; Thomas R Einarson; Linda D MacKeigan; Neil Shear; Antonio Addis; Nicole Mittmann; A Lane Ilersich Journal: Clin Ther Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 3.393
Authors: Branko Kopjar; Anne E B Sales; Sandra L Piñeros; Haili Sun; Yu-Fang Li; Ashley N Hedeen Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2003-11-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Philip S Wang; Rhonda L Bohn; Eric Knight; Robert J Glynn; Helen Mogun; Jerry Avorn Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-05-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michael J Stirratt; Jacqueline Dunbar-Jacob; Heidi M Crane; Jane M Simoni; Susan Czajkowski; Marisa E Hilliard; James E Aikens; Christine M Hunter; Dawn I Velligan; Kristen Huntley; Gbenga Ogedegbe; Cynthia S Rand; Eleanor Schron; Wendy J Nilsen Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2015-07-09 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Elizabeth B Lynch; Laurin Mack; Elizabeth Avery; Yamin Wang; Rebecca Dawar; DeJuran Richardson; Kathryn Keim; Jennifer Ventrelle; Bradley M Appelhans; Bettina Tahsin; Leon Fogelfeld Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-04-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Paul Muntner; Suzanne E Judd; Marie Krousel-Wood; William M McClellan; Monika M Safford Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Brodie M Sakakibara; Scott A Lear; Susan I Barr; Oscar Benavente; Charlie H Goldsmith; Noah D Silverberg; Jennifer Yao; Janice J Eng Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2017-09-04 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Najibah A Galadanci; Shehu Umar Abdullahi; Leah D Vance; Abdulkadir Musa Tabari; Shehi Ali; Raymond Belonwu; Auwal Salihu; Aisha Amal Galadanci; Binta Wudil Jibir; Halima Bello-Manga; Kathleen Neville; Fenella J Kirkham; Yu Shyr; Sharon Phillips; Brittany V Covert; Adetola A Kassim; Lori C Jordan; Muktar H Aliyu; Michael R DeBaun Journal: Am J Hematol Date: 2017-06-15 Impact factor: 10.047
Authors: William E Haley; Olivia N Gilbert; Robert F Riley; Jill C Newman; Christianne L Roumie; Jeffrey Whittle; Ian M Kronish; Leonardo Tamariz; Alan Wiggers; Donald E Morisky; Molly B Conroy; Eugene Kovalik; Nancy R Kressin; Paul Muntner; David C Goff Journal: J Am Soc Hypertens Date: 2016-09-07