| Literature DB >> 34079422 |
David Price1,2, Rupert Jones3, Pascal Pfister4, Hui Cao5, Victoria Carter6, Anu Kemppinen6, Björn Holzhauer4, Alan Kaplan7, Allan Clark8, David M G Halpin9, Hilary Pinnock10, James D Chalmers11, Job F M van Boven12, Kai M Beeh13, Konstantinos Kostikas14, Nicolas Roche15, Omar Usmani16, Paul Mastoridis5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Poor treatment adherence in COPD patients is associated with poor clinical outcomes and increased healthcare burden. Personalized approaches for adherence management, supported with technology-based interventions, may offer benefits to patients and providers but are currently unproven in terms of clinical outcomes as opposed to adherence outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: adherence monitoring; applications; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; medication adherence; pragmatic randomized clinical trial; technology
Year: 2021 PMID: 34079422 PMCID: PMC8163732 DOI: 10.2147/POR.S302809
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pragmat Obs Res ISSN: 1179-7266
Figure 1MAGNIFY trial design.
Definitions of Population Sets
| Population Set | Definition |
|---|---|
| ASA site: Group of patients who satisfy inclusion criteria at baseline, and accepted the intervention package | |
| ASA site: Group of patients satisfying selection criteria (i.e. adherence to current mono/dual therapy ≤50%) and who were offered the intervention package (regardless of their acceptance) | |
| ASA site: Group of patients satisfying selection criteria (i.e. adherence to current mono/dual therapy ≤50%) and who accept or do not accept the technology |
Abbreviations: ASA, adherence support arm; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; ICS, inhaled corticosteroids; LABA, long-acting beta-2 agonists; LAMA, long-acting muscarinic antagonists.
Potential Sources of Bias and Measures to Address Bias
| Potential Source of Bias | Measures Taken to Address Bias |
|---|---|
| Date of initiation on the adherence package is used as the index date in the ASA patients, but there is no equivalent index date in the control arm. The median time from cluster randomization to the package initiation (i.e. delay) across all adherence support group sites will be determined and this delay value will be added to the time each control practice was cluster randomized, to obtain the follow-up period start date (“index date”) for patients at control sites. This approach ensures that the baseline is time-matched between the two arms, but may cause bias because in the control arm the index date is not defined on a patient-level as it is in the ASA | Sensitivity analyses will be conducted using: |
| Stepping up maintenance therapy is often considered as a treatment failure in clinical studies. However, if any maintenance therapy step up was considered a treatment failure, there would be potential bias for more treatment failures in the control arm due to patients on monotherapy being stepped up to LABA/LAMA or ICS/LABA (both in line with current treatment recommendations), while in the ASA initiation on the package (LABA/LAMA) at baseline of a patient previously on monotherapy cannot be considered a treatment failure | Only step up to triple therapy will be considered treatment failure in the primary analysis. However, a sensitivity analysis will be conducted using a modified definition of the primary outcome where any step up is considered a treatment failure |
| Participation in the trial may drive LABA/LAMA prescribing decisions at participating sites | Only sites that are actively prescribing LABA/LAMA will be included in the trial. LABA/LAMA is recommended for patients with COPD by the current treatment guidelines |
Abbreviations: ASA, adherence support arm; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; ICS, inhaled corticosteroids; LABA, long-acting beta-2 agonists; LAMA, long-acting muscarinic antagonists.