Quality of Life Research

, Volume 12, Issue 6, pp 621–633 | Cite as

Is adherence to drug treatment correlated with health-related quality of life?

  • Isabelle Côté
  • Karen Farris
  • David Feeny


Background: Adherence to drug treatment and health-related quality of life (HRQL) are two distinct concepts. Generally one would expect a positive relationship between the two. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between adherence and HRQL. Methods: HRQL was measured using the physical and mental summary measures of the RAND-12 (PHC-12, MHC-12), the SF-12 (PCS-12, MCS-12), HUI-2 and HUI-3. Adherence was assessed using Morisky's instrument. Three longitudinal datasets were used. One dataset included 100 hypertensive patients. Another dataset covered 199 high risk community-dwelling individuals. The third dataset consisted of 365 elderly patients. Spearman's correlation coefficients were used to assess association. Subgroup analyses by type of medication and inter-temporal analyses were also performed. Results: Correlation between adherence and PHC-12 ranged from 0.08 (p = 0.26) to 0.22 (p < 0.01). Correlations between adherence and MHC-12 ranged from 0.11 (p = 0.11) to 0.15 (p < 0.01). Similar results were observed using HUI-2, HUI-3, and SF-12 as well as by type of medication and in the lagged analyses. Conclusions: Correlations between HRQL and adherence were positive but typically weak or negligible in magnitude.

Adherence Health-related quality of life Health Utilities Index RAND-12 SF-12 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM. Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence. Med Care 1986; 24(1): 67–74.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hume AL. Applying quality of life data in practice: Considerations for antihypertensive therapy. J Fam Pract 1989; 28(4): 403–407.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Testa MA, Simonson DC. Assessment of quality-of-life outcomes. N Engl J Med 1996; 334(13): 835–840.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Revicki DA, Osoba D, Fairclough D, et al. Recommendations on health-related quality of life research to support labeling and promotional claims in the United States. Qual Life Res 2000; 9(8): 887–900.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Green LW, Kreuter MW. Health Promotion Planning: An Educational and Environmental Approach. 2nd ed., Mountain View CA: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Health Behavior and Health Education. 2nd ed., San Francisco: Josey-Bass Publishers, 1997.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Adherence to Treatment in Medical Conditions. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    The Handbook of Health Behavior Change. 2nd ed., New York: Springer Publishing Co., 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bond WS, Hussar DA. Detection methods and strategies for improving medication compliance. Am J Hosp Pharm 1991; 48(9): 1978–1988.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eraker SA, Kirscht JP, Becker MH. Understanding and improving patient compliance. Ann Intern Med 1984; 100(2): 258–268.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schaub AF, Steiner A, Vetter W. Compliance to treatment. Clin Exp Hypertens 1993; 15(6): 1121–1130.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Becker MH, Maiman LA. Sociobehavioral determinants of compliance with health and medical care recommendations. Med Care 1975; 13(1): 10–24.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kirscht JP, Rosenstock IM. Patient adherence to antihypertensive medical regimens. J Community Health 1977; 3(2): 115–124.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fincham J. The drug use process. In: Fincham J, Wertheimer A (ed), Pharmacy and the U.S. Health Care System. New York: Pharmaceutical Products Press, 1998; 394–438.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haynes R. Determinants of Compliance: The Disease and the Mechanics of Treatment. Compliance in Health Care. Baltimore: The Hopkins University Press, 1979; 49–62.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Keeler EB, Brook RH, Goldberg GA, Kamberg CJ, Newhouse JP. How free care reduced hypertension in the health insurance experiment. JAMA 1985; 254(14): 1926–1931.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Soumerai SB, Avorn J, Ross-Degnan D, Gortmaker S. Payment restrictions for prescription drugs under Medicaid. Effects on therapy, cost, and equity. N Engl J Med 1987; 317(9): 550–556.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Evans RG, Stoddart GL. Producing health, consuming health care. Soc Sci Med 1990; 31(12): 1347–1363.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grootendorst P, Feeny D, Furlong W. Health Utilities Index Mark 3: Evidence of construct validity for stroke and arthritis in a population health survey. Med Care 2000; 38(3): 290–299.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Billups SJ, Malone DC, Carter BL. The relationship between drug therapy noncompliance and patient characteristics, health-related quality of life, and health care costs. Pharmacotherapy 2000; 20(8): 941–949.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Holzemer WL, Corless IB, Nokes KM, et al. Predictors of self-reported adherence in persons living with HIV disease. AIDS Patient Care STDS 1999; 13(3): 185–197.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pippalla RS, Chinburapa V, Duval R, Akula RS. Interrelationship of quality of life, compliance, clinical outcomes and life satisfaction: A cross-sectional study on hypertensive geriatrics. J Clin PharmTherap 1997; 22: 357–369.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sung JCY, Nichol MB, Venturini V, Bailey KL, McCombs JS, Cody M. Factors affecting patient compliance with antihyperlipidemic medications in an HMO population. Am J Man Care 1998; 4: 4121–1430.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kassam R, Farris KB, Burback L, Volume CI, Cox CE, Cave A. Pharmaceutical care research and education project: Pharmacists' interventions. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash) 2001; 41(3): 401–410.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Volume CI, Farris KB, Kassam R, Cox CE, Cave A. Pharmaceutical care research and education project: Patient outcomes. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash) 2001; 41(3): 411–420.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ware J, Snow K, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 Health Survey Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, 1993.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hays RD. RAND-36 Health Status Inventory. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation (Harcourt Brace & Company), 1998.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Health Utilities Inc. Health-Related-Quality-of-Life. http://, Accessed July 12, 2002.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hopman WM, Towheed T, Anastassiades T, et al. Canadian normative data for the SF-36 health survey. Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study Research Group. Cmaj 2000; 163(3): 265–271.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Feeny DH, Torrance GW, Furlong WJ. Health utilities index. In: Spilker B (ed), Quality of Life and Pharmaco-economics in Clinical Trials. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996: 239–252.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance GW, et al. Multiplicative multi-attribute utility function for the health utilities index mark 3 (HUI3) system: A technical report. 98-11. 1998. McMaster University, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, 1998.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Little R, Rubin D. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1987.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Guyatt GH, Berman LB, Townsend M, Pugsley SO, Chambers LW. A measure of quality of life for clinical trials in chronic lung disease. Thorax 1987; 42(10): 773–778.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lawrence WF, Fryback DG, Martin PA, Klein R, Klein BE. Health status and hypertension: A population-based study. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49(11): 1239–1245.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bond WS, Hussar DA. Detection methods and strategies for improving medication compliance. Am J Hosp Pharm 1991; 48: 1978–1988.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Haynes RB, Taylor DW, Sackett DL, Gibson ES, Bernholz CD, Mukherjee J. Can simple clinical measurements detect patient noncompliance? Hypertension 1980; 2(6): 757–764.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stewart M. The validity of an interview to assess a patient's drug taking. Am J Prev Med 1987; 3(2): 95–100.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cramer JA, Mattson RH, Prevey ML, Scheyer RD, Ouellette VL. How often is medication taken as prescribed? A novel assessment technique. JAMA 1989; 261(22): 3273–3277.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Waterhouse DM, Calzone KA, Mele C, Brenner DE. Adherence to oral tamoxifen: A comparison of patient self-report, pill counts, and microelectronic monitoring. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11(6): 1189–1197.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isabelle Côté
    • 1
  • Karen Farris
    • 2
    • 3
  • David Feeny
    • 2
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Innovus Research Inc.BurlingtonCanada
  2. 2.Institute of Health EconomicsEdmontonCanada
  3. 3.University of IowaIowa CityUSA
  4. 4.University of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  5. 5.Health Utilities Inc.Canada

Personalised recommendations