4.2 Article

Correlates of Medication Nonadherence Among Latinos With Type 2 Diabetes

期刊

DIABETES EDUCATOR
卷 38, 期 4, 页码 552-561

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0145721712445215

关键词

-

资金

  1. Peers for Progress Network [G00007943]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose The purpose of this study is to assess factors related to diabetes medication nonadherence in a sample of predominantly Spanish-speaking Mexican-origin adults residing along the US-Mexico border. Methods As part of a randomized controlled trial, 302 patients randomly sampled from a clinic roster completed a baseline interview. Medication nonadherence was assessed with the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale. Consistent with the framework proposed by Venturini et al, four factors were examined: patient-related attributes, drug regimen characteristics and complexity, health status, and patient-provider interaction characteristics. Results Sixty percent of the patients were classified as nonadherent. Men, those who engaged in diabetes control behaviors less frequently, and individuals with depression were more likely to be classified as nonadherent. Among those who were Spanish-dominant, education and self-rated health also were significantly and negatively related to medication adherence; patients with a high school education or greater and those who more positively rated their health were more likely to be classified as nonadherent compared to those with less than a high school education and those who rated their health as poor. Conclusions Results reflect potentially higher medication nonadherence rates for Latinos with type 2 diabetes living in rural communities along the US-Mexico border. Additionally, this study supports the need to address strategies to support medication adherence, including addressing depression, for diabetes control. Strategies to promote adherence among Latino men are sorely needed, as are strategies to address forgetfulness and carelessness regarding diabetes medicine taking.

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

4.2
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