4.3 Article

Initial Therapy, Regimen Change, and Persistence in a Spanish Cohort of Newly Treated Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Retrospective, Observational Study Using Real-World Data

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17103742

关键词

adherence; antidiabetics; comorbidity; diabetes; persistence; real-world data; Spain; treatment patterns

资金

  1. Gobierno de Aragon
  2. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) Construyendo Europa desde Aragon [B01_20R]
  3. ERDF through the Interreg V-A Spain-France-Andorra Program (POCTEFA 2014-2020)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The World Health Organization considers the non-adherence to medication a significant issue with global impact, especially in chronic conditions such as type 2 diabetes. We aim to study antidiabetic treatment initiation, add-on, treatment switching, and medication persistence. We conducted an observational study on 4247 individuals initiating antidiabetic treatment between 2013 and 2014 in the EpiChron Cohort (Spain). We used Cox regression models to estimate the likelihood of non-persistence after a one-year follow-up, expressed as hazard ratios (HRs). Metformin was the most frequently used first-line antidiabetic (80% of cases); combination treatment was the second most common treatment in adults aged 40-79 years, while dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors were the second most common in individuals in their 80s and over, and in patients with renal disease. Individuals initiated on metformin were less likely to present addition and switching events compared with any other antidiabetic. Almost 70% of individuals initiated on monotherapy were persistent. Subjects aged 40 and over (HR 0.53-0.63), living in rural (HR 0.79) or more deprived areas (HR 0.77-0.82), or receiving polypharmacy (HR 0.84), were less likely to show discontinuation. Our findings could help identify the population at risk of discontinuation, and offer them closer monitoring for proper integrated management to improve prognosis and health outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据