Search

Objectives: To review studies of patient compliance/persistence with cardiovascular or antidiabetic medication published since the year 2000; to compare the methods used to measure compliance/persistence across studies; to compare reported compliance/persistence rates across therapeutic classes and to assess whether compliance/persistence correlates with clinical outcomes.Methods: English language papers published between January 2000 and November 2005 investigating patient compliance/persistence with cardiovascular or antidiabetic medication were identified through searches of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Definitions and measurements of compliance/persistence were compared across therapeutic areas using contingency tables.Results: Of the 139 studies analysed, 32% focused on hypertension, 27% on diabetes and 13% on dyslipidaemia. The remainder covered coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in general. The most frequently reported measure of compliance was the 12-month medication possession ratio (MPR). The overall mean MPR was 72%, and the MPR did not differ significantly between treatment classes (range: 67-76%). The average proportion of patients with an MPR of >80% was 59% overall, 64% for antihypertensives, 58% for oral antidiabetics, 51% for lipid-lowering agents and 69% in studies of multiple treatments, again with no significant difference between treatment classes. The average 12-month persistence rate was 63% and was similar across therapeutic classes. Good compliance had a positive effect on outcome in 73% of the studies examining clinical outcomes.Conclusions: Non-compliance with cardiovascular and antidiabetic medication is a significant problem, with around 30% of days 'on therapy' not covered by medication and only 59% of patients taking medication for more than 80% of their days 'on therapy' in a year. Good compliance has a positive effect on clinical outcome, suggesting that the management of CVD may be improved by improving patient compliance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Workplace productivity evaluations often involve subjective assessments. This study was performed to develop and validate a new multidimensional instrument, the Health and Work Questionnaire (HWQ), for measuring workplace productivity and worker heath.Methods. In a prospective, non-randomized study, objective and subjective workplace productivity (measured with the HWQ) was assessed among 96 current, 94 former, and 104 non-smoking volunteer reservation agents at a US-based international airline.Results. Six HWQ sub-scales were identified from factor analyses: productivity, concentration/focus, supervisor relations, impatience/irritability, work satisfaction, and non-work satisfaction. Non-smokers (individuals who had never smoked) had higher scores on all scales. The HWQ scale scores all correlated significantly with the objective measure 'Time Lost'; two of the scales correlated significantly with the summary objective performance measure. Magnitudes of the significant correlations were modest (0.12 to 0.22).Conclusions. The HWQ may be useful for evaluating the impact of interventions on workplace productivity. Additional validation research on the HWQ is recommended before use as a primary measure in studies of worker productivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this month's column, the authors evaluate the cost effectiveness of oseltamivir and zanamivir, compared with standard care, for the treatment of influenza. Using efficacy data from randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials, a cost-effectiveness model was constructed. In an influenza-positive patient population, the cost per symptomfree day was $16 for zanamivir-treated patients compared with $39 for oseltamivir-treated patients. Considering a hypothetical drug budget of $100,000, 919 additional patients could be treated with zanamivir than with oseltamivir. Treatment with zanamivir would result in a gain of 1,714 symptom-free days and 52 fewer influenza-related complications than if oseltamivir were used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Older adults are more likely to suffer from the adverse effects of digoxin. Studies have described the inappropriate use of digoxin in various populations. The objective of this study was to determine the correlates of inappropriate digoxin use in older heart failure patients.Methods: We studied older hospitalized heart failure patients with documented left ventricular (LV) function evaluation and electrocardiography. Digoxin use was considered inappropriate if patients had preserved LV systolic function (ejection fraction greater > or =40%) or if they had no atrial fibrillation (AF). We compared baseline patient characteristics by indication for digoxin and tested statistical significance using Pearson's chi-square analysis and Student's t tests. Using logistic regression, we determined the correlates of inappropriate use and initiation of digoxin.Results: Subjects (N = 603) had a mean age of 79 (+/-7) years; 59% were women, and 18% were African American. A total of 376 patients (62%) were discharged on digoxin, and 223 (37%) had no indication for its use. Half of the patients without an indication for digoxin received the drug. Of 132 patients without an indication and not already on digoxin, 38 (29%) were initiated on it. After adjustment for various patient and care characteristics, prior digoxin use (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 11.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.72-23.02) and pulse > or =100/min (adjusted OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.10-4.94) were associated with inappropriate digoxin use. Pulse > or =100/min was also associated with inappropriate initiation of the drug (adjusted OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.28-6.78).Conclusions: Inappropriate use of digoxin was common and was associated with prior use. Tachycardia was associated with inappropriate use and initiation. Electrocardiography and echocardiography should be performed in all older heart failure patients. Digoxin therapy should not be initiated or continued in patients without any evidence of LV systolic dysfunction or chronic AF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]