Pharmacy World and Science

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 73–77 | Cite as

Measurement of patient compliance.

  • A.H.P. Paes
  • A. Bakker
  • C.J. Soe‐Agnie


The compliance of 91 diabetic patients using oral antidiabetics was studied. Patient compliance was measured using four different methods. Patients received their medication in a Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS)‐container. Each time the patient went back to the pharmacy for refill prescriptions, the number of tablets left in the container were counted. Pharmacy records were used to study the number of days of delay in getting the next refill. At the end of the study, a questionnaire was sent to every patient. Using MEMS as a standard, the results show that pill count and refill data overestimate the compliance of this group of patients. The MEMS data also show that the compliance data using only the number of tablets may be biased, because of possible overconsumption. Pill count does not show a correlation with compliance as measured by MEMS. The relation between compliance as measured with MEMS and refill compliance is weak.

Data collection Oral antidiabetics Patient compliance 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Backes JM, Schentag JJ. Partial compliance as a source of variance in pharmacokinetics and therapeutic drug monitoring. In: Cramer JA, Spilker B, eds. Patient compliance in medical practice and clinical trials. New York: Raven Press, 1991: 27–36.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Levy RA. Failure to refill prescriptions. In: Cramer JA, Spilker B, eds. Patient compliance in medical practice and clinical trials. New York: Raven Press, 1991: 11–8.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blom AThG, Paes AHP. De therapie-trouw kan worden verbeterd (Patient compliance can be improved). Geneesmiddelenbulletin 1992;26: 40–3.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mikael RL, Sharpe T. Patient compliance. In: Wertheimer AI, Smith MC, eds. Pharmacy practice. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1974: 179–94.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cramer JA, Mattson RH, Prevey ML, Scheyer RD, Ouellette VL. How often is medication taken as prescribed? A novel assessment technique. JAMA 1989;261: 3273–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Epstein LH, Cluss PA. A behavioral medicine perspective on adherence to longterm medical regimens. J Consult Clin Psychol 1982;50: 950–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pennings-van der Eerden L, Visser APh. Diabetes mellitus. In: Kaptein AA, van der Ploeg HM, Garssen B, Schreurs PJG, Beunderman R, eds. Behavioral medicine. Alphen a/d Rijn: Samsom Stafleu, 1986.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stolk RP, Grobbee DE. Epidemiologie van diabetes mellitus (Epidemiology of diabetes mellitus). Diagnose Informatie en Medische Statistiek (DIMS) 1992;(12): 4–7.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herings RMC. Effecten van chronisch/gecombineerd gebruik van geneesmiddelen (Effects of chronic drug use). Utrecht: Vakgroep Praktische Farmacie, 1989.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rudd P, Ahmed S, Zachery V, Barton C, Bonduelle D. Improved compliance measures: Applications in an ambulatory hypertensive drug dial. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1990;48: 676–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Waterhouse DM, Calzone KA, Mele C, Brenner DE. Adherence to oral tamoxifen: A comparison of patient selfreport, pill counts, and microelectronic monitoring. Eur J Clin Pharm 1993;11: 1189–97.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kruse W, Nikolaus T, Rampmaier J, Weber E, Schlierf G. Actual versus prescribed timing of lovastatin doses assessed by electronic compliance monitoring. Eur J Clin Pharm 1993;45: 211–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    DeTullio PL, Kirking DM, Arslanian C, Olson DE. Compliance measure development and assessment of theophylline therapy in ambulatory patients. J Clin Pharm Ther 1987;12:19–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Enlund H, Tuomilehto J, Turakka H. Patient report validated against prescription records for measuring use of and compliance with antihypertensive drugs. Acta Med Scand 1981;209: 271–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dowse R, Futter WT. Outpatient compliance with theophylline and phenytoin therapy. S Afr Med J 1991;80: 550–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Inui ThS, Carter WB, Pecoraro RE. Screening for noncompliance among patients with hypertension: Is self-report the best available measure? Med Care 1981;19: 1061–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sackett DL. A compliance practicum for the busy practitioner. In: Haynes RB, Taylor DW, Sacket DL, eds. Compliance in health care. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979: 290.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM. Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence. Med Care 1986;24: 67–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • A.H.P. Paes
    • 1
  • A. Bakker
    • 1
  • C.J. Soe‐Agnie
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Pharmacoepidemiology and PharmacotherapyUniversiteit UtrechtUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Centrum ApotheekVeldhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations