首页> 外文期刊>Current medical research and opinion >Improving the accuracy of medication adherence measures using linked prescription and dispensation data: findings from the ESOSVAL cohort of patients treated with osteoporosis drugs
【24h】

Improving the accuracy of medication adherence measures using linked prescription and dispensation data: findings from the ESOSVAL cohort of patients treated with osteoporosis drugs

机译:使用联系的处方和分配数据提高药物依从性措施的准确性:从骨质疏松症药物治疗的患者的eSosval队列的结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: We compare estimates of proportion of days covered (PDC) based on dispensation-only data versus linked prescription and dispensation information, and we analyse their differences in a real-world cohort of patients with osteoporosis.Methods: Prospective cohort study. We compared four alternative measures of PDC, using dispensation-only data: a) with a fixed assessment interval; b) censoring the assessment interval at the moment of the last refill; and using linked prescription and dispensation data: c) considering a minimum prescription gap of three months to interpret interruption by the physician; and d) considering any prescription gap.Results: The mean PDC at 12months for new users was 63.1% using dispensation-only data and a fixed interval, 86.0% using dispensation-only data and a last-refill interval, 81% using linked dispensation and prescription data and censoring any period without prescription, and 78.3% when using linked prescription and dispensation data and censoring periods of at least 3months. For experienced users, the figures were 80.0%, 88.9%, 83% and 81%, respectively. Overall, dispensation-based measures presented issues of patient misclassification.Conclusions: Linked prescription and dispensation data allows for more precise PDC estimates than dispensation-only data, as both primary non-adherence and early non-adherence periods, and fully non-adherent patients, are all identified and accounted for.
机译:目的:我们基于仅分配数据与联系处方和分配信息进行比较覆盖的日子比例(PDC)的估计,我们分析了骨质疏松症患者的现实世界队列的差异。方法:未来的队列研究。我们比较了PDC的四种替代措施,使用唯一的数据数据:a)固定的评估间隔; b)在最后一次补充的时刻审查评估间隔;并使用链接的处方和分配数据:c)考虑到最低处方差距为三个月来解释医生中断;和d)考虑任何处方差距。结果:使用分配数据和固定间隔的12个月为12个月,使用分配数据和最后一填充间隔,86.0%,使用链接分配,86.0%,平均PDC为63.1%,86.0%,使用链接分配81%和处方数据并在使用相关的处方和分配数据和至少3个月的审查期间审查任何未经处方的时期,78.3%。对于经验丰富的用户,这些数字分别为80.0%,88.9%,83%和81%。总体而言,基于分配的措施提出了患者错误分类的问题。结论:链接的处方和分配数据允许更精确的PDC估计而不是仅分配数据,作为初级非依从性和早期非依从期,以及完全非依赖患者,都被确定并占了。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号