Advertisement

PharmacoEconomics

, Volume 31, Issue 12, pp 1155–1168 | Cite as

Cost Effectiveness of Medication Adherence-Enhancing Interventions: A Systematic Review of Trial-Based Economic Evaluations

  • Edwin J. M. Oberjé
  • Reina J. A. de Kinderen
  • Silvia M. A. A. Evers
  • Cees M. J. van Woerkum
  • Marijn de Bruin
Systematic Review

Abstract

Background

In light of the pressure to reduce unnecessary healthcare expenditure in the current economic climate, a systematic review that assesses evidence of cost effectiveness of adherence-enhancing interventions would be timely.

Objective

Our objective was to examine the cost effectiveness of adherence-enhancing interventions compared with care as usual in randomised controlled trials, and to assess the methodological quality of economic evaluations.

Methods

MEDLINE, PsycInfo, EconLit and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases were searched for randomised controlled trials reporting full economic evaluations of adherence-enhancing interventions (published up to June 2013). Information was collected on study characteristics, cost effectiveness of treatment alternatives, and methodological quality.

Results

A total of 14 randomised controlled trials were included. The quality of economic evaluations and the risk of bias varied considerably between trials. Four studies showed incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) below the willingness-to-pay threshold. Few studies seemed to evaluate interventions that successfully changed adherence.

Conclusions

Only 14 randomised controlled trials examined the cost effectiveness of adherence interventions. Despite that some studies showe favourable ICERs, the overall quality of studies was modest and the economic perspectives applied were frequently narrow. To demonstrate that adherence interventions can be cost effective, we recommend that proven-effective adherence programmes are subjected to comprehensive economic evaluations.

Keywords

Cost Effectiveness Economic Evaluation Usual Care Uncertainty Analysis Adherence Intervention 
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.

Notes

Funding information

This study was funded by ZonMw (the Netherlands), programme Doelmatigheidsonderzoek (grant number 171002208). This funding source had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation or writing of the report.

Conflicts of interest

All authors (EO, RdK, CvW, SE and MdB) declare that they have no competing interests.

Author contributions

EO had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: EO, MdB, SE and CvW. Acquisition of data: EO. Analysis and interpretation of data: EO, RdK and MdB. Drafting of the manuscript: EO and MdB. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: EO, MdB, SE, RdK and CvW. Obtained funding: MdB.

References

  1. 1.
    Sabaté E. Adherence to long-term therapies: evidence for action, vol. 7. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003. p. 48–9.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    DiMatteo MR, Giordani PJ, Lepper HS, et al. Patient adherence and medical treatment outcomes. A meta-analysis. Med Care. 2002;40(9):794–811.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Knapp M, King D, Pugner K, et al. Non-adherence to antipsychotic medication regimens: associations with resource use and costs. Br J Psychiatry. 2004;184(6):509–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Colom F, Vieta E, Tacchi M, et al. Identifying and improving non-adherence in bipolar disorders. Bipolar Disord. 2005;7(s5):24–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    White TJ, Vanderplas A, Ory C, et al. Economic impact of patient adherence with antidepressant therapy within a managed care organization. Dis Manage Health Outcome. 2003;11(12):817–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bender BG, Rand C. Medication non-adherence and asthma treatment cost. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004;4(3):191.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sokol MC, McGuigan KA, Verbrugge RR, et al. Impact of medication adherence on hospitalization risk and healthcare cost. Med Care. 2005;43(6):521–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee WC, Balu S, Cobden D, et al. Medication adherence and the associated health-economic impact among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus converting to insulin pen therapy: an analysis of third-party managed care claims data. Clin Ther. 2006;28(10):1712–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scalera A, Bayoumi AM, Oh P, et al. Clinical and economic implications of non-adherence to HAART in HIV infection. Dis Manage Health Outcome. 2002;10(2):85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goldie SJ, Paltiel AD, Weinstein MC, et al. Projecting the cost-effectiveness of adherence interventions in persons with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Am J Med. 2003;115(8):632.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Osterberg L, Blaschke T. Adherence to medication. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(5):487–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mahoney JJ, Ansell BJ, Fleming FWK, et al. The unhidden cost of noncompliance. J Manage Care Pharm. 2008;14:S1–29.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cutler DM, Everett W. Thinking outside the pillbox—medication adherence as a priority for health care reform. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(17):1553–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haynes RB, Ackloo E, Sahota N, et al. Interventions for enhancing medication adherence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(2):CD000011.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McDonald HP, Garg AX, Haynes RB. Interventions to enhance patient adherence to medication prescriptions. JAMA. 2002;288(22):2868–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Roebuck MC, Liberman JN, Gemmill-Toyama M, et al. Medication adherence leads to lower health care use and costs despite increased drug spending. Health Aff. 2011;30(1):91–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Elliott RA, Barber N, Horne R. Cost-effectiveness of adherence-enhancing interventions: a quality assessment of the evidence. Ann Pharmacother. 2005;39(3):508–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. USA: Oxford University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jönsson B. Ten arguments for a societal perspective in the economic evaluation of medical innovations. Eur J Health Econ. 2009;10(4):357–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Krol M, Brouwer W, Sendi P. Productivity costs in health-state valuations: does explicit instruction matter? Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(4):401–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Grosse SD. Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2008;8(2):165–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bolton MB, Tilley BC, Kuder J, et al. The cost and effectiveness of an education program for adults who have asthma. J Gen Intern Med. 1991;6(5):401–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bosmans JE, Brook OH, van Hout HPJ, et al. Cost effectiveness of a pharmacy-based coaching programme to improve adherence to antidepressants. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(1):25–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Brunenberg DEM, Wetzels GEC, Nelemans PJ, et al. Cost effectiveness of an adherence-improving programme in hypertensive patients. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(3):239–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Elliott RA, Barber N, Clifford S, et al. The cost effectiveness of a telephone-based pharmacy advisory service to improve adherence to newly prescribed medicines. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30(1):17–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Freedberg KA, Hirschhorn LR, Schackman BR, et al. Cost-effectiveness of an intervention to improve adherence to antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected patients. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2006;43:S113–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Healey A, Knapp M, Astin J, et al. Cost-effectiveness evaluation of compliance therapy for people with psychosis. Br J Psychiatry. 1998;172(5):420–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hederos CA, Janson S, Hedlin G. Group discussions with parents have long-term positive effects on the management of asthma with good cost–benefit. Acta Paediatr. 2005;94(5):602–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Keeler EB, Robalino DA, Frank JC, et al. Cost-effectiveness of outpatient geriatric assessment with an intervention to increase adherence. Med Care. 1999;37(12):1199–206.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Khdour MR, Agus AM, Kidney JC, et al. Cost–utility analysis of a pharmacy-led self-management programme for patients with COPD. Int J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;33(4):665–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Murray D, Stroupe KT, Wu J, et al. Pharmacist intervention to improve medication adherence in heart failure. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:714–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schroeder K, Fahey T, Hollinghurst S, et al. Nurse-led adherence support in hypertension: a randomized controlled trial. Fam Pract. 2005;22(2):144–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    von Knorring L, Åkerblad AC, Bengtsson F, et al. Cost of depression: effect of adherence and treatment response. Eur Psychiat. 2006;21(6):349–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Von Korff M, Katon W, Bush T, et al. Treatment costs, cost offset, and cost-effectiveness of collaborative management of depression. Psychosom Med. 1998;60(2):143–9.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Windsor RA, Bailey WC, Richards JM Jr, et al. Evaluation of the efficacy and cost effectiveness of health education methods to increase medication adherence among adults with asthma. Am J Public Health. 1990;80(12):1519–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    de Bruin M, Viechtbauer W, Hospers HJ, et al. Standard care quality determines treatment outcomes in control groups of HAART-adherence intervention studies: implications for the interpretation and comparison of intervention effects. Health Psychol. 2009;28(6):668.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    de Bruin M, Viechtbauer W, Schaalma HP, et al. Standard care impact on effects of highly active antiretroviral therapy adherence interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(3):240.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gafni A, Birch S. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): the silence of the lambda. Soc Sci Med. 2006;62(9):2091–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Briggs A, Sculpher M, Buxton M. Uncertainty in the economic evaluation of health care technologies: the role of sensitivity analysis. Health Econ. 1995;3(2):95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ. 2001;10(8):779–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Briggs A. Economic evaluation and clinical trials: size matters. The need for greater power in cost analyses poses an ethical dilemma. BMJ. 2000;321(7273):1362–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Barber JA, Thompson SG. Analysis of cost data in randomized trials: an application of the non-parametric bootstrap. Stat Med. 2000;19(23):3219–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Boutron I, Estellat C, Guittet L, et al. Methods of blinding in reports of randomized controlled trials assessing pharmacologic treatments: a systematic review. PLoS Med. 2006;3(10):e425.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Albrecht L, Archibald M, Arseneau D, Scott SD. Development of a checklist to assess the quality of reporting of knowledge translation interventions using the Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research (WIDER) recommendations. Implement Sci. 2013;8:52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Freedland KE, Mohr DC, Davidson KW, et al. Usual and unusual care: existing practice control groups in randomized controlled trials of behavioral interventions. Psychosom Med. 2011;73(4):323–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edwin J. M. Oberjé
    • 1
  • Reina J. A. de Kinderen
    • 2
  • Silvia M. A. A. Evers
    • 2
  • Cees M. J. van Woerkum
    • 3
  • Marijn de Bruin
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Communication Science, Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI)Maastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Social Sciences, Strategic Communication GroupWageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Division of Applied Health Sciences, Aberdeen Health Psychology GroupUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenScotland

Personalised recommendations