To develop a predictive model that projects patient adherence to new and existing medication regimens.
Methods:
A panel of adherence experts was convened to develop a decision theoretic model to predict and explain patient medication adherence behavior. Two predictive models were developed: one for patients new to their regimen and one for patients on an existing regimen. The models have 12 and 13 predictive factors of adherence, respectively. The panel developed levels for each factor and diagnostic value estimates for each level.
Results:
Both models were tested by having randomly generated hypothetical patient medication adherence profiles scored by the model developers and a separate panel of healthcare practitioners. These scores were then compared with predictions made by the model. For the new-to-regimen model, the correlations were 0.86 for the development panel and 0.68 for the healthcare practitioner panel. Only the practitioner panel scored the existing medication model. The model's correlation with their scores was 0.88.
Conclusions:
The medication adherence model seems to have promise as an approach to predicting the likelihood of medication adherence. The model has the benefit of considering many factors of adherence simultaneously. It can also highlight areas that may result in patient nonadherence and suggest potential intervention strategies to enhance patient adherence to a medication regimen.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SackettDLSnowJC.The magnitude of compliance and noncompliance. HaynesRBTaylorDWSackettDL, eds. In: Compliance in health care. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979: 11–22.
2.
CramerJASpilkerB.Patient compliance in medical practice and clinical trials. New York: Raven Press, 1991: 19–25.
3.
McDermottMMSchmittBWallnerE.Impact of medication nonadherence on coronary heart disease outcomes. Arch Intern Med.1997; 157: 1921–9.
4.
WegnerNKFroelicherESSmithLKCardiac rehabilitation. Clinical practice guideline, no 17. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, October 1995;(AHCPR) 96-0672.
5.
ErakerSAKirschtJPBeckerMH.Understanding and improving patient compliance. Ann Intern Med1984; 100: 258–68.
6.
GustafsonDHShuklaRDelbecqALWalsterW.Comparative study of differences in subjective likelihood estimates: individuals, interacting, delphi, & nominal groups. Organ Behav Hum Perform1973; 9: 380–91.
7.
MurphyJCosterG.Issues in patient compliance. Drugs1997; 54: 797–800.
8.
BurkeLEDunbar-JacobJ.Adherence to medication, diet, and activity recommendations: from assessment to maintenance. J Cardiovasc Nurs1995; 9: 62–79.
9.
ReidLDChristensenDB.A psychosocial perspective in the explanation of patients' drug-taking behavior. Soc Sci Med1988; 27: 277–85.
10.
LeeJYKusekJWGreenePGBernhardSNorrisKSmithDAssessing medication adherence by pill count and electronic monitoring in the Cochrane GM. Compliance and outcomes in patients with asthma. Drugs1996; 52 (suppl 6): 12–9.
11.
CramerJA.Enhancing patient compliance in the elderly: role of packaging aids and monitoring. Drugs Aging1998; 12: 7–15.
12.
InsullW.The problem of compliance to cholesterol altering therapy. J Intern Med1997; 241: 317–25.
13.
McElnayJCMcCaffionCRAl-DeagiFScottM.Self-reported medication non-compliance in the elderly. Eur J Clin Pharmacol1997; 53: 171–8.
MoriskyDEDeMuthNMField-FassMGreenLWLevineDM.Evaluation of family health education to build social support for long-term control of high blood pressure. Health Educ Q1985; 12: 35–50.
22.
GreensteinSSiegalB.Compliance and noncompliance in patients with a functioning renal transplant: a multicenter study. Transplantation1998; 66: 1718–26.
23.
JanzNKBeckerMH.The health belief model: a decade later. Health Educ Q1984; 11: 1–47.
24.
VadherBPattersonDLLeaningM.Prediction of the international normalized ratio and maintenance dose during the initiation of warfarin therapy. Br J Clin Pharmacol1999; 48: 63–70.
25.
SheinerLWakefieldJ.Population modeling in drug development. Stat Methods Med Res1999; 8: 183–93.
26.
AhlbomAFeychtingM.A Bayesian approach to hazard identification. The case of electromagnetic fields and cancer. Ann N Y Acad Sci1999; 895: 27–33.
27.
SpiegelhalterDJMylesJPJonesDRKeithR.Methods in health service research: an introduction to Bayesian methods in health technology assessment. BMJ1999; 319: 508–12.
28.
SavageLJ.The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley, 1954.
29.
GustafsonDHLudkeRKestlyJJLarsonF.Probabilistic information processes: implications and evaluation semi-PIP diagnostic system. Comput Biomed Res1973; 6: 17–28.
30.
GustafsonDHFrybackDGRoseJAlemiFDetmerDERossmeisslJEvaluation of multiple trauma severity indices created by different index development strategies. Med Care1983; 21: 27–35.
31.
GustafsonDHFrybackDGRoseJHYickVProkopCTDetmerDEA decision theoretic methodology for severity index development. Med Decis Making1986; 6: 27–35.
32.
KahnemanDSlovicPTverskyA, eds. Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1982: 359–69.
33.
KeeneyRLRaiffaH.Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993: 282–349.
34.
ArkesHRHammondKR, eds. Judgment and Decision Making: An Interdisciplinary Reader. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1986: 642–79.
35.
GustafsonDHCats-BarilWLAlemiF.Systems to support health policy analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press, 1992: 395–412.
36.
LudkeRStaussFFGustafsonDH.Comparison of five methods for estimating subjective probability distributions. Organ Behav Hum Perform1977; 19: 162–79.
37.
Von WinterfeldtDEdwardsW.Decision analysis and behavioral research. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986: 90–161.
38.
MilgromHBenderBAckersonLBowryPSmithBRandC.Noncompliance and treatment failure in children with asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol1996; 98 (6 pt l): 1051–7.
39.
GustafsonDHawkinsRBobergEPingreeSSerlinRGrazianoFImpact of patient centered computer-based health information and support system. Am J Prev Med1999; 16: 1–9.
