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 theadherence 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.
RCT Entities:
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.
Authors: Gibril J Njie; Krista K Proia; Anilkrishna B Thota; Ramona K C Finnie; David P Hopkins; Starr M Banks; David B Callahan; Nicolaas P Pronk; Kimberly J Rask; Daniel T Lackland; Thomas E Kottke Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Mieke L van Driel; Michael D Morledge; Robin Ulep; Johnathon P Shaffer; Philippa Davies; Richard Deichmann Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-12-21
Authors: Nicholas Genes; Min Soon Kim; Frederick L Thum; Laura Rivera; Rosemary Beato; Carolyn Song; Jared Soriano; Joseph Kannry; Kevin Baumlin; Ula Hwang Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: K Ann McKibbon; Cynthia Lokker; Steven M Handler; Lisa R Dolovich; Anne M Holbrook; Daria O'Reilly; Robyn Tamblyn; Brian J Hemens; Runki Basu; Sue Troyan; Pavel S Roshanov Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-08-18 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Allison B McCoy; Lemuel R Waitman; Julia B Lewis; Julie A Wright; David P Choma; Randolph A Miller; Josh F Peterson Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-08-17 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Kaveh G Shojania; Alison Jennings; Alain Mayhew; Craig R Ramsay; Martin P Eccles; Jeremy Grimshaw Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2009-07-08