Differences in adherence and motivation to HIV therapy—two independent assessments in 1998 and 2002
- 87 Downloads
The aim of this study was to compare the level of adherence and motivation in two independent cross-sectional samples of HIV-infected patients conducted in 1998 and 2002, and to investigate the relationship between adherence and motivation.
Consecutive HIV-infected patients on treatment at a Swedish clinic were asked to complete an anonymous questionnaire. In 1998, 60 patients participated and in 2002, 53 participated. In 2002, the 9-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS) was added to the questionnaire set.
Main outcome measure
Self-reported adherence and motivation.
In 1998, 28.1% of the respondents were considered adherent, while the corresponding proportion was 57.4% in 2002 (P = 0.002). The mean summary score for MMAS was 10.7 in 2002 (13 = perfect adherence). The proportion considered motivated were 22.4% in the 1998 survey and 41.3% in 2002 (P = 0.038). Of the respondents considered motivated in the 2002 survey, 46.7% scored the maximum summary score on the MMAS, while 8.7% of the non-motivated respondents did so (P = 0.016).
The respondents in 2002 were more adherent and motivated than the respondents in 1998 and a relationship between motivation and adherence was found. The difference in adherence and motivation might be due to a new treatment model at the clinic.
KeywordsAcquired immunodeficiency syndrome AIDS HIV Highly active antiretroviral therapy MMAS Patient adherence Patient compliance Patient motivation Pharmacotherapy Sweden
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
We thank the following people for their assistance: Colleagues at the HIV clinic, Karolinska University Hospital – Huddinge and also the colleagues at the Department of Pharmacy, Uppsala University. Supported by the Lennhof foundation, Swedish Pharmaceutical Academy, the Department of Infectious Diseases at Karolinska University Hospital – Huddinge and Hospital Pharmacy, Huddinge University Hospital. Potential conflicts of interest: none declared.
- 17.Horne R. Compliance, adherence and concordance. In: Taylor K, Harding G, editors. Pharmacy practice. London: Taylor & Francis; 2001. p. 165–84Google Scholar
- 20.Chesney MA, Ickovics JR, Chambers DB, et al. Self-reported adherence to antiretroviral medications among participants in HIV clinical trials: the AACTG adherence instruments. Patient Care Committee & Adherence Working Group of the Outcomes Committee of the Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group (AACTG). AIDS Care 2000;12(3):255–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Stockwell Morris L, Schultz RM. Patient compliance—an overview. J Clin Pharm Therap 1992;17:283–295Google Scholar