• Karumathil M Murali, Judy Mullan, Steven Roodenrys, Hicham I Cheikh Hassan, and Maureen A Lonergan.
• Department of Nephrology, Wollongong Hospital, Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
• Patient Prefer Adher. 2022 Jan 1; 16: 346534773465-3477.

AimTo assess the quantitative and categorical agreement between two methods of measuring medication adherence: pharmacy refill-based medication possession rates and self-reported medication adherence scale.BackgroundCategorisation of adherence metrics using empirical cut-off scores can lead to misclassification, which can be overcome by expressing adherence as a continuous variable. Pharmacy refill-based adherence can be reported as actual rates, but the validity of expressing self-reported medication adherence scores as a continuous variable to reflect adherence is unknown and its quantitative agreement with refill-based adherence rates untested.MethodsPatients with kidney disease, including dialysis patients, from Illawarra Shoalhaven region of New South Wales, Australia were recruited between January 2015 and June 2016 to this cross-sectional study. Medication adherence was assessed using the self-reported Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS) and two pharmacy refill-based measures, Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) and Proportion of Days Covered (PDC) for antihypertensives and cardiometabolic drugs. Categorical and quantitative agreement between self-reported adherence and pharmacy refill-based adherence were assessed using tests of trend, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), Cohen's kappa and Bland-Altman analysis.ResultsWe recruited 113 patients. There was a significant declining trend of MPR (p < 0.001) and PDC (<0.001 for antihypertensives, p = 0.004 for cardiometabolic) scores among categories with worsening MMAS adherence. Adjusted ANCOVA showed significant association between self-report and pharmacy refill-based adherence (p < 0.001). Weighted Cohen's kappa statistics showed fair agreement between the self-report and pharmacy refill-based categories. Bland-Altman's analysis showed less than 5% of cases were outside the limits of agreement (-0.36 to 0.27) and the bias for MMAS was negative (-0.05 to -0.09), indicating MMAS did not overestimate adherence.ConclusionThere is modest agreement between pharmacy refill-based measures and self-report MMAS measures when assessed categorically or quantitatively. Assessing adherence as a continuous variable should be considered to overcome the challenges associated with categorization of adherence based on arbitrary thresholds.© 2022 Murali et al.

6 keywords...

hide…