IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v36y2018i1d10.1007_s40273-017-0570-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Concordance of Adherence Measurement Using Self-Reported Adherence Questionnaires and Medication Monitoring Devices: An Updated Review

Author

Listed:
  • Alisha Monnette

    (Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine)

  • Yichen Zhang

    (Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine)

  • Hui Shao

    (Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine)

  • Lizheng Shi

    (Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine)

Abstract

Introduction As medication adherence continues to be a prevalent issue in today’s society, the methods used to monitor medication-taking behaviors are constantly being re-evaluated and compared in search of the ‘gold standard’ measure. Our review aimed to assess the current literature surrounding the correlation between self-reported questionnaires (SRQs) and electronic monitoring devices to determine if these measures produce similar results. Methods We performed a literature search from 2009 to 2017 using PubMed, PubMed In-Process and Non-Indexed, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, and Ovid MEDLINE In-Process. A keyword search using the terms ‘patient compliance’, ‘treatment compliance’, ‘medication adherence’, ‘drug monitoring’, ‘drug therapy’, ‘electronic’, ‘digital’, ‘computer’, ‘monitor’, ‘monitoring’, ‘drug’, ‘pharmaceutical preparations’, ‘compliance’, and ‘medications’ was done to capture all articles. We included articles measuring adherence using both monitoring devices and SRQs. Results Thirty-five articles were included in this review. The average difference in measured adherence rates between the two measures was 9.2% (range −66.3 to 61.5). A majority (62.7%) of articles reported moderate (n = 12; 27.9%), high (n = 5, 11.6%), or significant (n = 10, 23.3%) correlations between SRQs and monitoring devices. Conclusion Results from our review are consistent with previous studies, as we found that many of our studies produced moderate to high correlation between both SRQs and monitoring devices [Farmer, Clin Ther 21(6):1074–90 (1999), IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics. Avoidable costs in US health care (2012), Patel et al., Respirology 18(3):546–52 (2013), Siracusa et al., J Cyst Fibros 14(5):621–6 (2015), Smith et al., Int J Cardiol 145(1):122–3 (2010)]. Our findings demonstrate that self-reported adherence produces comparable results to electronic monitoring devices. As there is not yet a ‘gold standard’ measure for monitoring patient adherence, SRQs and Medication Event Monitoring Systems (MEMS) operating together continue to emerge as the preferred effective method for measuring medication adherence.

Suggested Citation

  • Alisha Monnette & Yichen Zhang & Hui Shao & Lizheng Shi, 2018. "Concordance of Adherence Measurement Using Self-Reported Adherence Questionnaires and Medication Monitoring Devices: An Updated Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 17-27, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:36:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0570-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-017-0570-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-017-0570-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-017-0570-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:36:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0570-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.