Dataset Information

Impact of statin adherence on cardiovascular disease and mortality outcomes: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

While suboptimal adherence to statin medication has been quantified in real-world patient settings, a better understanding of its impact is needed, particularly with respect to distinct problems of medication taking. Our aim was to synthesize current evidence on the impacts of statin adherence, discontinuation and persistence on cardiovascular disease and mortality outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed studies using a mapped search of Medline, Embase and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts databases. Observational studies that met the following criteria were included: defined patient population;statin adherence exposure; defined study outcome [i.e. cardiovascular disease (CVD), mortality]; and reporting of statin-specific results.

Results

Overall, 28 studies were included, with 19 studies evaluating outcomes associated with statin adherence, six with statin discontinuation and three with statin persistence. Among adherence studies, the proportion of days covered was the most widely used measure, with the majority of studies reporting increased risk of CVD (statistically significant risk estimates ranging from 1.22 to 5.26)and mortality (statistically significant risk estimates ranging from 1.25 to 2.54) among non-adherent individuals. There was greater methodological variability in discontinuation and persistence studies. However, findings of increased CVD (statistically significant risk estimates ranging from 1.22 to 1.67) and mortality (statistically significant risk estimates ranging from 1.79 to 5.00) among nonpersistent individuals were also consistently reported.

Conclusions

Observational studies consistently report an increased risk of adverse outcomes associated with poor statin adherence. These findings have important implications for patients and physicians and emphasize the importance of monitoring and encouraging adherence to statin therapy.

SUBMITTER: De Vera MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4239963 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Previous research has shown that statin adherence for the primary prevention of CVD is lower compared to secondary prevention populations. Therefore the aim of this systematic review was to review predictors of statin adherence for the primary prevention of CVD. METHODS:A systematic search of papers published between Jan 1984 and May 2017 was conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, EMbase and CINAHL databases. A study was eligible for inclusion if; 1) it was a study of the general population or of patients with familial hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, diabetes or arthritis; 2) statins were prescribed; 3) adherence was defined and measured as the extent to which patients followed their statin regimen during the period of prescription, and 4) it was an original trial or observational study (excluding case reports). A study was subsequently excluded if 1) results were not presented separately for primary prevention; 2) it was a trial of an intervention (for example patient education). Papers were reviewed by two researchers and consensus agreed with a third. A quality assessment (QA) tool was used to formally assess each included article. To evaluate the effect of predictors, data were quantitatively and qualitatively synthesised. RESULTS:In total 19 studies met the inclusion criteria and nine were evaluated as high quality using the QA tool. The proportion of patients classed as "adherent" ranged from 17.8% to 79.2%. Potential predictors of statin adherence included traditional risk factors for CVD such as age, being male, diabetes and hypertension. Income associated with adherence more strongly in men than women, and highly educated men were more likely and highly educated women less likely to be adherent. Alcohol misuse and high BMI associated with non-adherence. There was no association between polypharmacy and statin adherence. The evidence base for the effect of other lifestyle factors and health beliefs on statin adherence was limited. CONCLUSION:Current evidence suggests that patients with more traditional risk factors for CVD are more likely to be adherent to statins. The implications for future research are discussed.

Project description:Prior studies have reported improvements in population-level risk factor burden and cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes using polypills for CVD risk reduction. However, a comprehensive assessment of the impact of polypills on CVD outcomes, mortality, adherence, and side effects across different settings has not previously been reported. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examining the association between polypill therapy and CVD outcomes published before February 2021. The primary outcome of interest was the risk of major adverse CVD events (MACE). Risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes were converted to log RR and pooled using a generic inverse variance weighted random-effects model. Data for continuous outcomes were pooled using random-effects modeling and presented as mean differences with 95% CIs. Eight studies representing 25,584 patients were included for analysis. In the overall pooled analysis, the use of polypills was associated with a non-significant reduction in the risk of MACE (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.70-1.02) and significant reductions in the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.81-1.00). The reductions in the risk of MACE with polypill use varied by baseline risk and nature of the study population (primary prevention vs. secondary prevention), with the most significant risk reduction among lower-risk cohorts, including within primary prevention populations [RR 0.70 (0.62, 0.79)]. Among measures of CVD risk factors, modest but significant reductions were observed for systolic and diastolic blood pressure [systolic: mean difference 1.99 mmHg (95% CI: -3.07 to -0.91); diastolic: mean difference 1.30 mmHg (95% CI: -2.42 to -0.19), but not for levels of total or low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol. Use of the polypill strategy significantly improved drug adherence (RR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.11-1.55) with no association between polypill use and rates of adverse events or drug discontinuation. The use of polypill formulations is associated with significant reductions in CVD risk factors and the risk of all-cause mortality and MACE, particularly in the low-risk and primary prevention population.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To determine the economic impact of medication non-adherence across multiple disease groups. DESIGN:Systematic review. EVIDENCE REVIEW:A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus in September 2017. Studies quantifying the cost of medication non-adherence in relation to economic impact were included. Relevant information was extracted and quality assessed using the Drummond checklist. RESULTS:Seventy-nine individual studies assessing the cost of medication non-adherence across 14 disease groups were included. Wide-scoping cost variations were reported, with lower levels of adherence generally associated with higher total costs. The annual adjusted disease-specific economic cost of non-adherence per person ranged from $949 to $44?190 (in 2015 US$). Costs attributed to 'all causes' non-adherence ranged from $5271 to $52?341. Medication possession ratio was the metric most used to calculate patient adherence, with varying cut-off points defining non-adherence. The main indicators used to measure the cost of non-adherence were total cost or total healthcare cost (83% of studies), pharmacy costs (70%), inpatient costs (46%), outpatient costs (50%), emergency department visit costs (27%), medical costs (29%) and hospitalisation costs (18%). Drummond quality assessment yielded 10 studies of high quality with all studies performing partial economic evaluations to varying extents. CONCLUSION:Medication non-adherence places a significant cost burden on healthcare systems. Current research assessing the economic impact of medication non-adherence is limited and of varying quality, failing to provide adaptable data to influence health policy. The correlation between increased non-adherence and higher disease prevalence should be used to inform policymakers to help circumvent avoidable costs to the healthcare system. Differences in methods make the comparison among studies challenging and an accurate estimation of true magnitude of the cost impossible. Standardisation of the metric measures used to estimate medication non-adherence and development of a streamlined approach to quantify costs is required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42015027338.

Project description:BackgroundAdherence rates of preventative medication for cardiovascular disease (CVD) have been reported as 57%, and approximately 9% of all CVD events in Europe are attributable to poor medication adherence. Mobile health technologies, particularly mobile apps, have the potential to improve medication adherence and clinical outcomes.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to assess the effects of mobile health care apps on medication adherence and health-related outcomes in patients with CVD. This study also evaluates apps' functionality and usability and the involvement of health care professionals in their use.MethodsElectronic databases (MEDLINE [Ovid], PubMed Central, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO [Ovid], Embase [Ovid], and Google Scholar) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate app-based interventions aimed at improving medication adherence in patients with CVD. RCTs published in English from inception to January 2020 were reviewed. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed for clinical outcomes and medication adherence, with meta-regression analysis used to evaluate the impact of app intervention duration on medication adherence.ResultsThis study included 16 RCTs published within the last 6 years. In total, 12 RCTs reported medication adherence as the primary outcome, which is the most commonly self-reported adherence. The duration of the interventions ranged from 1 to 12 months, and sample sizes ranged from 24 to 412. Medication adherence rates showed statistically significant improvements in 9 RCTs when compared with the control, and meta-analysis of the 6 RCTs reporting continuous data showed a significant overall effect in favor of the app intervention (mean difference 0.90, 95% CI 0.03-1.78) with a high statistical heterogeneity (I2=93.32%). Moreover, 9 RCTs assessed clinical outcomes and reported an improvement in systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in the intervention arm. Meta-analysis of these clinical outcomes from 6 RCTs favored app interventions, but none were significant. In the 7 trials evaluating app usability, all were found to be acceptable. There was a great variation in the app characteristics. A total of 10 RCTs involved health care professionals, mainly physicians and nurses, in the app-based interventions. The apps had mixed functionality: 2 used education, 7 delivered reminders, and 7 provided reminders in combination with educational support.ConclusionsApps tended to increase medication adherence, but interventions varied widely in design, content, and delivery. Apps have an acceptable degree of usability; yet the app characteristics conferring usability and effectiveness are ill-defined. Future large-scale studies should focus on identifying the essential active components of successful apps.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42019121385; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=121385.