4.2 Article

How Well Does Patient Self-Report Predict Asthma Medication Possession? Implications for Medication Reconciliation and Adherence Assessment

Journal

JOURNAL OF ASTHMA
Volume 47, Issue 8, Pages 878-882

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/02770903.2010.491143

Keywords

asthma; self-report; medication possession; medication adherence; medication reconciliation; asthma education; inhaled corticosteroids; short-acting bronchodilators

Funding

  1. Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Self-report is the most commonly used method for collecting information regarding asthma medication possession and adherence in clinical practice. Objective. To determine the agreement between self-report and pharmacy claims data for asthma medication possession. Methods. This is a retrospective study that examined pharmacy claims data 12 months before and after participants completed a structured asthma survey. This study was performed in a sample of health care workers and dependents > 17 years old in a large, self-insured Midwestern United States health care center. The main outcome measure was agreement (kappa calculation) between self-report and pharmacy claims data of asthma medication possession. Results. Self-report of asthma medication use agreed moderately with pharmacy claims data for short-acting albuterol (kappa = 0.47 +/- 0.03), salmeterol (kappa = 0.79 +/- 0.04), and montelukast (kappa = 0.69 +/- 0.03) but only slightly for inhaled corticosteroids (kappa = 0.18 +/- 0.03) and prednisone (kappa = 0.10 +/- 0.03) (n = 1050 respondents). Both under self-reporting and over self-reporting were common with inhaled corticosteroids (14.4% and 23.1%, respectively) and varied significantly by specific drug type. Conclusions. Self-report moderately agrees with asthma medication possession for most adult asthma patients, though the agreement differs considerably between and within asthma medication classes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available