4.4 Article

Measurement of children's asthma medication adherence by self report, mother report, canister weight, and Doser CT

Journal

ANNALS OF ALLERGY ASTHMA & IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 85, Issue 5, Pages 416-421

Publisher

AMER COLL ALLERGY ASTHMA IMMUNOLOGY
DOI: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)62557-4

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [M01-RR00051] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [R01-HL45157] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Accurate assessment of medication adherence has been difficult to achieve but is essential to drug evaluation in clinical trials and improved outcomes in clinical care. Objective: This study was conducted to compare four adherence assessment methods: child report, mother report, canister weight, and electronic measurements of metered dose inhaler (MDI) actuation. Methods: Participants included 27 children with mild-to-moderate asthma who were followed prospectively for 6 months. All patients used an MDI equipped with an electronic Doser attached to their inhaled steroid. At each 2-month follow up visit, Doser and canister weight data were recorded, while child and mother were interviewed separately regarding medication use. Results: Children and mothers reported, on average, over 80% adherence with the prescribed inhaled steroid. Canister weight revealed, on average, adherence of 69%, significantly lower than self-report. When adherence recorded by the electronic Doser was truncated to no more than 100% of prescribed daily use, average adherence was 50%. Older children and adolescents, nonwhite children, and these from poorer functioning families were least adherent. Conclusions: Electronic adherence monitoring was significantly more accurate than self-report or canister weight measures. Such accuracy is an essential prerequisite to increasing understanding of the treatment, setting, and patient factors that influence adherence, and to the consequent design of effective intervention strategies.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available