4.3 Article

Low Medication Adherence and the Incidence of Stroke Symptoms Among Individuals With Hypertension: The REGARDS Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL HYPERTENSION
Volume 13, Issue 7, Pages 479-486

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2011.00464.x

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services [U01 NS041588]
  2. National Institute on Aging [R01 AG022536]
  3. [R01 HL80477]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The authors analyzed data on 9950 participants taking antihypertensive medications in the nationwide Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study to determine the association between medication adherence and incident stroke symptoms. Medication adherence was assessed using a validated 4-item self-report scale and participants were categorized into 4 groups (scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 or 4, with higher scores indicating worse adherence). The incidence of 6 stroke symptoms (sudden weakness on one side of the body, numbness, painless loss of vision in one or both eyes, loss of half vision, losing the ability to understand people, and losing the ability to express oneself verbally or in writing) was assessed via telephone interviews every 6 months. During a median of 4 years, the incidence of any stroke symptom was 14.6%, 17.9%, 20.2%, and 24.9% among participants with adherence scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 or 4, respectively (P <.001). The multivariable adjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for any stroke symptom associated with adherence scores of 1, 2, and 3 or 4, vs 0, was 1.20 (1.04-1.39), 1.23 (0.94-1.60), and 1.59 (1.08-2.33), respectively (P <.001). Worse adherence was also associated with higher multivariable adjusted hazard ratios for each of the 6 stroke symptoms. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2011; 13: 479-486. (c) 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available