CONTEXT: Refill reminders can help patients improve adherence to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy. However, little is known about patient preferences for reminder type or whether patients who express a preference differ from patients who do not. OBJECTIVES: To describe patient preferences for ICS prescription refill reminder type and to compare baseline ICS therapy adherence, measured as proportion of days covered (PDC) 1 year before initiating preference-based reminders, between patients who did and did not express a preference. DESIGN: This substudy within a randomized multi-intervention study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente Colorado. Adults with asthma randomized to intervention were offered the opportunity to choose text, telephone, or email reminders. Patients who did and did not provide a preference were compared by baseline characteristics using log-binomial models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcomes were reminder preference and type. RESULTS: A total of 1497 of 4545 patients (32.9%) expressed a preference; 789 (52.7%) chose text. The adjusted relative risk (aRR) of not providing a preference increased with decreasing PDC (PDC of 0.50 to < 0.80: aRR, 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.25; PDC < 0.5: aRR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.59-1.95) compared with patients with a PDC of 0.80 or greater. CONCLUSION: Among patients who expressed a preference, text reminders were preferred. Patients who expressed a preference had higher baseline adherence. Further research is needed to determine whether expressing a preference for a refill reminder type is itself associated with adherence. Given that offering the opportunity to choose a reminder type only engaged a subset of patients, further work is needed to understand how best to leverage technology-enabled communication outreach to help patients optimize adherence.
CONTEXT: Refill reminders can help patients improve adherence to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy. However, little is known about patient preferences for reminder type or whether patients who express a preference differ from patients who do not. OBJECTIVES: To describe patient preferences for ICS prescription refill reminder type and to compare baseline ICS therapy adherence, measured as proportion of days covered (PDC) 1 year before initiating preference-based reminders, between patients who did and did not express a preference. DESIGN: This substudy within a randomized multi-intervention study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente Colorado. Adults with asthma randomized to intervention were offered the opportunity to choose text, telephone, or email reminders. Patients who did and did not provide a preference were compared by baseline characteristics using log-binomial models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcomes were reminder preference and type. RESULTS: A total of 1497 of 4545 patients (32.9%) expressed a preference; 789 (52.7%) chose text. The adjusted relative risk (aRR) of not providing a preference increased with decreasing PDC (PDC of 0.50 to < 0.80: aRR, 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.25; PDC < 0.5: aRR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.59-1.95) compared with patients with a PDC of 0.80 or greater. CONCLUSION: Among patients who expressed a preference, text reminders were preferred. Patients who expressed a preference had higher baseline adherence. Further research is needed to determine whether expressing a preference for a refill reminder type is itself associated with adherence. Given that offering the opportunity to choose a reminder type only engaged a subset of patients, further work is needed to understand how best to leverage technology-enabled communication outreach to help patients optimize adherence.
Authors: Bruce G Bender; Peter J Cvietusa; Glenn K Goodrich; Ryan Lowe; Heather A Nuanes; Cynthia Rand; Susan Shetterly; Cathy Tacinas; William M Vollmer; Nicole Wagner; Frederick S Wamboldt; Stanley Xu; David J Magid Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 16.193
Authors: Scott A Davis; Delesha Carpenter; Charles Lee; Nacire Garcia; Daniel S Reuland; Gail Tudor; Ceila E Loughlin; Betsy Sleath Journal: Ann Pharmacother Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 3.154
Authors: Marsha A Raebel; Susan M Shetterly; Bharati Bhardwaja; Andrew T Sterrett; Emily B Schroeder; Joseph Chorny; Tyson P Hagen; David J Silverman; Rex Astles; Ira M Lubin Journal: Popul Health Manag Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 2.459
Authors: Andrea D Gelzer; Wanzhen Gao; David Keleti; Thomas Donia; Lauren Megargell; Jeffrey Kreitman; Karen E Michael Journal: J Asthma Date: 2018-03-22 Impact factor: 2.515
Authors: Marsha A Raebel; Susan M Shetterly; Glenn K Goodrich; Courtney B Anderson; Jo Ann Shoup; Nicole Wagner; Bruce G Bender Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Bruce G Bender; Nicole M Wagner; Jo A Shoup; Glenn K Goodrich; Susan M Shetterly; Peter J Cvietusa; Courtney B Anderson; Stan Xu; Debra P Ritzwoller; Cathy Tacinas; Diane K King; Marsha A Raebel Journal: Med Care Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Alex D Federman; Rachel O'Conor; Irina Mindlis; Jamillah Hoy-Rosas; Diane Hauser; Joseph Lurio; Nandini Shroff; Ray Lopez; Joel Erblich; Michael S Wolf; Juan P Wisnivesky Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 21.873