Current Hypertension Reports

, Volume 2, Issue 6, pp 515–524 | Cite as

Observational studies of antihypertensive medication use and compliance: Is drug choice a factor in treatment adherence?

  • Krista A. Payne
  • Sahra Esmonde-White
Article

Abstract

Real-world adherence to pharmacotherapy cannot be studied in the confines of the traditional clinical trial. Thus, to better understand adherence to antihypertensive medication in actual practice, a literature search was conducted to identify observational database studies of the use of antihypertensive medication. Ten studies were identified: half studied adherence patterns after initial prescriptions to patients with a new diagnosis of hypertension, and the others evaluated antihypertensive medication use in a mix of patients with newly diagnosed or chronic hypertension. Overall, results demonstrated that adherence to treatment for hypertension in the first year is very poor. In addition, it appears that initial treatment with newer classes of drugs, such as angiotensin II antagonists, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, and calcium channel blockers favors treatment adherence. This review also highlights and discusses possible underlying factors contributing to these results and implications for physicians.

Keywords

Calcium Channel Blocker Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitor Antihypertensive Medication Antihypertensive Therapy Antihypertensive Prescription 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Semenciw RM, Morrison HI, Mao Y, et al.: Major risk factors for cardiovascular disease mortality in adults: results from the Nutrition Canada Survey Cohort. Int J Epidemiol 1988, 17:317–324.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rabkin SW, Matthewson FAL, Tate RB: Predicting risk of ischemic heart disease and cerebrovascular disease from systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Ann Intern Med 1978, 88:342–345.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heart and Stroke Facts. Dallas: American Heart Association; 1994:23.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chan B, Coyte P, Heick D: Economic impact of cardiovascular disease in Canada. Can J Cardiol 1996, 12:1000–1006.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burt VL, Whelton P, Roccella EJ, et al.: Prevalence of hypertension in the US adult population: results from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–1991. Hypertension 1995, 25:305–313.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stockwell DM, Madhaven S, Cohen H, et al.: The determinants of hypertension, awareness, treatment and control in an insured population. Am J Public Health 1994, 84:1768–1774.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hershey JC, Morton BG, Davis JB, et al.: Patient compliance with antihypertensive medication. Am J Public Health 1980, 70:1081–1089.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lücher TF, Vetter H, Siegenthaler W, et al.: Compliance in hypertension: facts and concepts. J Hypertens 1985, 3:3–9.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bittar N: Maintaining long-term control of blood pressure: the role of improved compliance. Clin Cardiol 1995, 18:312–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clark T: Improving patient compliance and increasing control of hypertension: needs of special hypertensive populations. Am Heart J 1991, 121(Pt 2):664–669.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Revicki DL, Frank L: Pharmacoeconomic evaluations in the real world. Effectiveness versus efficacy studies. Pharmacoeconomics 1999, 15:423–434. This theoretical paper compares traditional randomized and controlled clinical trials and real-world studies of effectiveness, with a specific focus on design, objectives, statistical analyses, and methodological and generalizability issues. This paper provides the rationale for the use and significance of observational data when adherence is being studied.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group: Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 1992, 268:2420–2425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Neaton JD, Frimm RH, Prineas RJ, et al.: Treatment of mild hypertension study. Final results. JAMA 1993, 270:713–724.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    SHEP Cooperative Research Study Group: Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension: final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP). JAMA 1991, 265:3255–3264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Feinstein A: An additional basic science for clinical medicine II: the limitations of randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 1983, 99:544–550.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Andrade SE, Walker AM, Gottlieb LK, et al.: Discontinuation of antihyperlipidemic drugs: do rates reported in clinical trials reflect rates in primary care settings? N Engl J Med 1995, 332:1125–1131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Caro JJ, Speckman JL: Existing treatment strategies: does non-compliance make a difference? J Hypertens 1998, 16(suppl 7):S31-S34.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Birnbaum HG, Cremiex PY, Greenberg PE, et al.: Using health care claims data for outcomes research and pharmacoeconomic analyses. Pharmacoeconomics 1999, 16:1–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Christensen DB, Williams B, Goldberg HI, et al.: Comparison of prescription and medical records in reflecting patient antihypertensive drug therapy. Ann Pharmacother 1994, 28:99–104.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Enlund H: Measuring patient compliance in antihypertensive therapy — some methodological aspects. J Clin Hosp Pharm 1982, 7:43–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McCombs JS, Nichol MB, Newman, et al.: The costs of interrupting antihypertensive drug therapy in a Medicaid population. Med Care 1994, 32:214–226.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Monane M, Bohn RL, Gurwitz JH, et al.: The effects of initial drug choice and comorbidity on antihypertensive therapy compliance. Results from a population-based study in the elderly. Am J Hypertens 1997, 10:697–704.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Okano GJ, Rascati KL, Wilson JP, et al.: Patterns of antihypertensive use among patients in the US Department of Defense database initially prescribed an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker. Clin Ther 1997, 19:1433–1445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bloom BS: Continuation of initial antihypertensive medication after 1 year of therapy. Clin Ther 1998, 20:671–681. This paper reports on a retrospective prescription database study of antihypertensive medication use in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension initially treated with one of the five classes of antihypertensive medications: diuretics, b-blockers, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, or angiotensin II antagonists. This is the only study of its kind that includes initial treatment with angiotensin II antagonists. Authors conclude that initial choice of antihypertensive medication use is a factor in treatment adherence.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Caro JJ, Speckman JL, Salas M, et al.: Effect of initial drug choice on persistence with antihypertensive therapy: the importance of actual practice data. Can MedAssoc J 1999, 160:41–46. This retrospective database study, the largest of its kind, presents the results of a Canadian analyis of initial antihypertensive medication use in 22,000 patients with newly diagnosed hypertension. The authors concluded that initial choice of antihypertensive medication use is a factor in treatment adherence.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Psaty BM, Savage PJ, Tall GS, et al.: Temporal patterns of antihypertensive medication use among elderly patients. The Cardiovascular Health Study. JAMA 1993, 270:1837–1841.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jones JK, Gorkin L, Lian JF, et al.: Discontinuation of and changes in treatment after start of new courses of antihypertensive drugs: a study of a United Kingdom population. BMJ 1995, 311:293–295.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bailey JE, Lee MD, Somea GW, et al.: Risk factors for antihypertensive medication refill failure by patients under Medicaid managed care. Clin Ther 1996, 18:1252–1262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Christensen DB, Williams B, Goldberg HI, et al.: Assessing compliance to antihypertensive medications using computerbased pharmacy records. Med Care 1997, 35:1164–1170.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rizzo JA, Simons RS: Variations in compliance among hypetensive patients by drug class: implications for health care costs. Clin Ther 1997, 19:1446–1457.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Feldman R, Bacher M, Campbell C, et al.: Adherence to pharmacologic management of hypertension. Can J Public Health 1998, 89:I16-I18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rudd P: Compliance with antihypertensive therapy: raising the bar of expectations. Am J Manag Care 1998, 4:957–966.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Flack JM, Nocikov SV, Ferrario CM: Benefits of adherence to antihypertensive drug therapy. Eur Heart J 1996, 17(Suppl A):16–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Croog SH, Levine S, Testa MA, et al.: The effects of antihypertensive therapy on the quality of life. N Engl J Med 1986, 314:1657–1664.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Nelson EC, Stason WB, Neutra RR, et al.: Identification of the noncompliant hypertensive patient. Prev Med 1980, 9:504–517.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Toyoshima H, Takahashi K, Akera T: The impact of side effects on hypertension management: a Japanese survey. Clin Ther 1997, 19:1458–1469. This study, which used telephone survey methods among hypertensive patients, suggests that rates of patient-reported side effects in actual practice may differ from the those reported in the clinical trial setting.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Williams GH: Assessing patient wellness: new perspectives on quality of life and compliance. Am J Hypertens 1998, 1:186S-191S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Borrild NJ: Patients‘ experiences of antihypertensve drugs in routine use: results of a Danish general practice survey. Blood Pressure 1997, 6(Suppl 1):23–25.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Düsing R, Weisser B, Mengden T, et al.: Changes in antihypertesive therapy — the role of adverse effects and compliance. Blood Pressure 1998, 7:313–315.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kaplan NM: Angiotensin II-receptor blockers: will they replace angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors in the treatment of hypertension? J Human Hypertens 2000, 14(Suppl 1):587–590.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Caro JJ, Payne K: Real-world effectiveness of antihypertensive drugs. Can Med Assoc J 2000, 162:190.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wright JM, Lee C, Chambers GK: Real-world effectivness of antihypertensive drugs [letter]. Can Med Assoc J 2000, 162:190–191.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Myers MG: Compliance in hypertension: Why don‘t patients take their pills? Can Med Assoc J 1999, 160:64–65.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wright JM, Lee CH, Chambers GK: Systematic review of antihypertensive therapies: does the evidence assist in choosing a first-line drug? Can Med Assoc J 1999, 161:25–32.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Materson BJ, Reda DJ, Massie BM, et al.: Single-drug therapy for hypertension in men. A comparison of six antihypertensive agents with placebo. The Department of Veterans‘ Affairs Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents. N Engl J Med 1993, 328:914–921.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Phillipp T, Anlauf M, Distler A, et al.: Randomised, doubleblind multicentre comparison of hydrochlorothiazide, atenolol, nitredipine, and enalapril in antihypertensive treatment: results of the HANE study. HANE Trial Study Group. BMJ 1997, 315:154–159.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wright JM: Choosing a first-line drug in the management of elevated blood pressure. What is the evidence? I. Thiazide diuretics. Can Med Assoc J 2000, 163:57–60. This article, the first in a series of three, reports on the evidence provided by randomized, controlled clinical trials with respect to the selection of first-line antihypertensive therapy. The author provides data in support of the stepped-care approach to hypertension, recommending that treatment be initiated with thiazide diuretics rather than any of the newer agents in the absence of contraindications.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    McInnes GT: Integrated approaches to management of hypertension: promoting treatment acceptance. Am Heart J 1999, 138:S252-S255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Eisen SA, Miller DK, Woodward RS, et al.: The effect of prescribed daily dose frequency on patient medication compliance. Arch Intern Med 1990, 150:1881–1884.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Skaer TL, Sclar DA, Robison LM, et al.: Effect of pharmaceutical formulation for antihypertensive therapy on health service utilization. Clin Ther 1993, 15:715–725.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sclar DA, Skaer TL, Legg RF, et al.: Effect of pharmaceutical formulation of diltiazem on the utilization of Medicaid and health maintenance organization services. Clin Ther Res 1994, 55:1136–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Darnell JC, Murray MD, Martz BL, et al.: Medication use by ambulatory elderly: an in-home survey. J Am Geriatr Soc 1986, 34:1–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Caro JJ, Payne K, Getsios D, et al.: Modeling the cost-effectiveness of initial antihypertensive choices. Paper presented at the Canadian Health Economics Research Association (CHERA). Edmonton, Alberta, 1999.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: The sixth report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC-VI). Arch Intern Med 1997, 157:2413–2446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wright JM: Choosing a first-line drug in the management of elevated blood pressure. What is the evidence? 2. b-blockers. Can Med Assoc J 2000, 163:188–192.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wright JM: Choosing a first-line drug in the management of elevated blood pressure. What is the evidence? 3. Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors. Can Med Assoc J 2000, 163:293–296.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Krista A. Payne
    • 1
  • Sahra Esmonde-White
    • 1
  1. 1.Caro ResearchDorvalCanada

Personalised recommendations