4.7 Article

Medication non-adherence and therapeutic inertia independently contribute to poor disease control for cardiometabolic diseases

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-21916-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. AstraZeneca

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the relative contribution of medication adherence and clinician-level therapeutic inertia to disease control in cardiometabolic patients. The results suggest that both poor medication adherence and therapeutic inertia are associated with persistent health gaps, but therapeutic inertia has a greater impact on disease control.
Poorly controlled cardiometabolic biometric health gap measures [e.g.,uncontrolled blood pressure (BP), HbA1c, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)] are mediated by medication adherence and clinician-level therapeutic inertia (TI). The study of comparing relative contribution of these two factors to disease control is lacking. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using 7 years of longitudinal electronic health records (EHR) from primary care cardiometabolic patients who were 35 years or older. Cox-regression modeling was applied to estimate how baseline proportion of days covered (PDC) and TI were associated with cardiometabolic related health gap closure. 92,766 patients were included in the analysis, among which 89.9%, 85.8%, and 73.3% closed a BP, HbA1c, or LDL-C gap, respectively, with median days to gap closure ranging from 223 to 408 days. Patients who did not retrieve a medication were the least likely to achieve biometric control, particularly for LDL-C (HR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.55-0.60). TI or uncertainty of TI was associated with a high risk of health gap persistence, particularly for LDL-C (HR ranges 0.46-0.48). Both poor medication adherence and TI are independently associated with persistent health gaps, and TI has a much higher impact on disease control compared to medication adherence, implying disease management strategies should prioritize reducing TI.

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

4.7
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