Treatment patterns and factors associated with adherence in pulmonary arterial hypertension.

IF 1 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY FARMACIA HOSPITALARIA Pub Date : 2024-12-05 DOI:10.1016/j.farma.2024.10.014
Marta Albanell-Fernández, María Margalida Mestre, Belén López, Rubén González-García, Jaume Planas, Marta Serrano, Emma Wilhelmi, Thais Lizondo, Dolors Soy, Maite Martín-Conde
{"title":"Treatment patterns and factors associated with adherence in pulmonary arterial hypertension.","authors":"Marta Albanell-Fernández, María Margalida Mestre, Belén López, Rubén González-García, Jaume Planas, Marta Serrano, Emma Wilhelmi, Thais Lizondo, Dolors Soy, Maite Martín-Conde","doi":"10.1016/j.farma.2024.10.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Improving understanding of actual pulmonary hypertension (PH) treatment adherence patterns is crucial to properly treating these patients. We aimed to primarily assess adherence to treatments used for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) specific therapies, identify potential factors related to it and secondly describe its treatment patterns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 6-month observational cross-sectional study in a tertiary care hospital was conducted. Patients with PH-targeted therapy who picked it up in the ambulatory hospital pharmacy and who had been on treatment with the same drug for at least 1 year were included. Adherence was assessed as: 1) Proportion of days covered (PDC); and 2) Simplified Medication Adherence Questionnaire (SMAQ). PDC greater than 80% was considered adherent. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate the study outcomes. Logistic regressions were estimated to identify the association between baseline characteristics and factors associated with adherence. A p < 0.05 indicated statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 63 patients with 127 different treatments were included, 71.4% were females with a mean age (SD) of 59 (DE 15) years. PAH was the most common diagnosis (74.6%). Double therapy was used in 39.7% of patients, being the combination of macitentan + tadalafil and ambrisentan + tadalafil the most prescribed. Endothelin receptor antagonists were the most used treatment (40.2%). Adherence according to PDC was 93.7%, showing no great differences depending on the targeted drug used, and according to SMAQ 61.9%. The agreement degree of both methods was slight (65.1%; Kappa 0.12). Only female sex (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.06-0.90; p = 0.035) was associated with worse adherence in the SMAQ method but not in the PDC. Adverse events were reported by a 55.6% of participants and the perception of effective treatment was high (95.2%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Adherence to PH therapy differs depending on the assessment method; PDC showed greater adherence rate than SMAQ. According to SMAQ, female sex may have a negative impact on adherence in this cohort, but PDC revealed no factors influencing it. No notable differences in adherence between treatment types were found and generally patients felt the treatments were effective in controlling their disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":45860,"journal":{"name":"FARMACIA HOSPITALARIA","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FARMACIA HOSPITALARIA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.farma.2024.10.014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Improving understanding of actual pulmonary hypertension (PH) treatment adherence patterns is crucial to properly treating these patients. We aimed to primarily assess adherence to treatments used for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) specific therapies, identify potential factors related to it and secondly describe its treatment patterns.

Methods: A 6-month observational cross-sectional study in a tertiary care hospital was conducted. Patients with PH-targeted therapy who picked it up in the ambulatory hospital pharmacy and who had been on treatment with the same drug for at least 1 year were included. Adherence was assessed as: 1) Proportion of days covered (PDC); and 2) Simplified Medication Adherence Questionnaire (SMAQ). PDC greater than 80% was considered adherent. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate the study outcomes. Logistic regressions were estimated to identify the association between baseline characteristics and factors associated with adherence. A p < 0.05 indicated statistical significance.

Results: A total of 63 patients with 127 different treatments were included, 71.4% were females with a mean age (SD) of 59 (DE 15) years. PAH was the most common diagnosis (74.6%). Double therapy was used in 39.7% of patients, being the combination of macitentan + tadalafil and ambrisentan + tadalafil the most prescribed. Endothelin receptor antagonists were the most used treatment (40.2%). Adherence according to PDC was 93.7%, showing no great differences depending on the targeted drug used, and according to SMAQ 61.9%. The agreement degree of both methods was slight (65.1%; Kappa 0.12). Only female sex (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.06-0.90; p = 0.035) was associated with worse adherence in the SMAQ method but not in the PDC. Adverse events were reported by a 55.6% of participants and the perception of effective treatment was high (95.2%).

Conclusions: Adherence to PH therapy differs depending on the assessment method; PDC showed greater adherence rate than SMAQ. According to SMAQ, female sex may have a negative impact on adherence in this cohort, but PDC revealed no factors influencing it. No notable differences in adherence between treatment types were found and generally patients felt the treatments were effective in controlling their disease.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肺动脉高压患者依从性的治疗模式和相关因素。
目的:提高对肺动脉高压(PH)患者实际治疗依从性模式的认识,对正确治疗这些患者至关重要。我们的主要目的是评估肺动脉高压(PAH)和慢性血栓栓塞性肺动脉高压(CTEPH)特异性治疗的依从性,确定与之相关的潜在因素,其次描述其治疗模式。方法:在某三级医院进行为期6个月的观察性横断面研究。在医院门诊药房接受ph靶向治疗的患者,并且使用同一药物治疗至少1 年的患者被纳入研究。依从性评估为:1)覆盖天数比例(PDC);2)简化服药依从性问卷(SMAQ)。PDC大于80%被认为是粘附的。对研究结果进行统计分析。估计Logistic回归以确定基线特征与依从性相关因素之间的关联。A p 结果:共纳入63例患者,127种不同的治疗方法,71.4%为女性,平均年龄(SD) 59 (DE 15)岁。PAH是最常见的诊断(74.6%)。39.7%的患者采用双药治疗,其中以马西坦+他达拉非和安布里森坦+他达拉非联合用药最多。使用内皮素受体拮抗剂最多(40.2%)。根据PDC的依从性为93.7%,根据使用的靶向药物没有很大差异,根据SMAQ的依从性为61.9%。两种方法的符合度较低(65.1%;卡巴0.12)。只有女性(OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.06-0.90;p = 0.035)与SMAQ方法的依从性较差相关,而与PDC方法无关。55.6%的参与者报告了不良事件,对有效治疗的看法很高(95.2%)。结论:PH治疗依从性因评估方法的不同而不同;PDC的依从率高于SMAQ。根据SMAQ,女性可能对该队列依从性有负面影响,但PDC未显示影响因素。治疗类型之间的依从性没有显著差异,患者普遍认为治疗有效地控制了他们的疾病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
FARMACIA HOSPITALARIA
FARMACIA HOSPITALARIA PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
21.40%
发文量
46
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: Una gran revista para acceder a los mejores artículos originales y revisiones de la farmacoterapia actual. Además, es Órgano de expresión científica de la Sociedad Española de Farmacia Hospitalaria, y está indexada en Index Medicus/Medline, EMBASE/Excerpta Médica, Alert, Internacional Pharmaceutical Abstracts y SCOPUS.
期刊最新文献
Stability of thermolabile drugs at room temperature. A review. Criteria for medication reconciliation in major orthopedic surgery in high-risk patients: A consensus based on the Delphi method. Messenger RNA as a new strategy against cancer. Effectiveness and safety of liposomal rapamycin for the treatment of facial angiofibromas in tuberous sclerosis. [Translated article] Pharmacokinetic-guided switching from standard half-life factor VIII to extended half-life pegylated factor VIII in haemophilia A therapy in clinical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1