Correlation between adherence rates measured by MEMS and self-reported questionnaires: a meta-analysis.
Correlation between adherence rates measured by MEMS and self-reported questionnaires: a meta-analysis.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1477-7525-8-99
复制
发表时间：
2010-09-13
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Pawaskar M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Shi L;Liu J;Fonseca V;Walker P;Kalsekar A;Pawaskar M
了解药物事件监测系统(MEMS)和自我报告问卷(SRQ)之间的联系是至关重要的，因为两者都经常被用来衡量药物依从性，并可能产生不同的结果。此外，使用替代措施的经济影响很重要，因为电子监测设备的费用不在保险范围内，而自我报告是临床环境中最实用和最具成本效益的方法。这项荟萃分析考察了两种药物依从性测量方法的相关性：MEMS和SRQS。文献检索(1980-2009)使用了PubMed、Ovid MEDLINE、QicINFO(EBSCO)、CINAHL(EBSCO)、Ovid HealthStar、EMBASE(Elsevier)和Cochrane数据库。如果MEMS和SRQS测量的粘附性之间的相关系数[Pearson(Rp)或Spearman(Rs)]可用或可以根据文章中的其他统计数据计算，则纳入研究。用标准化的方案和摘要形式独立提取数据一式两份，包括1)第一作者姓名；2)发表年份；3)参与者的疾病状况；4)样本量；5)平均年龄(年)；6)试验持续时间(月)；7)SRQ名称(如果有)；8)依从性(%)由MEMS测量；9)依从性(%)由SRQ测量(%)；10)相关系数和相关信息，包括p值，95%可信区间(CI)。使用随机效应模型进行Meta分析以汇集相关系数。11项研究(N=1,684名患者)符合纳入标准。MEMS测量的粘附率为74.9%(53.4%~92.9%)，SRQ为84.0%(68.35%~95%)。MEMS测量的粘附性与SRQs之间的相关性在0.24~0.87之间。11项研究的合并相关系数为0.45(p=0.001，95%可信区间[95%CI]：0.34-0.56)。对报道RP的7项研究和报道RS的4项研究进行亚组Meta分析，合并相关系数分别为0.46(p=0.011，95%CI：0.33-0.59)和0.43(p=0.0038，95%CI：0.23-0.64)。其他亚组分析均未发现差异。通过MEMS和SRQS衡量的服药依从性往往至少是适度相关的，这表明SRQs对服药依从性给出了一个很好的估计。
It is vital to understand the associations between the medication event monitoring systems (MEMS) and self-reported questionnaires (SRQs) because both are often used to measure medication adherence and can produce different results. In addition, the economic implication of using alternative measures is important as the cost of electronic monitoring devices is not covered by insurance, while self-reports are the most practical and cost-effective method in the clinical settings. This meta-analysis examined the correlations of two measurements of medication adherence: MEMS and SRQs. The literature search (1980-2009) used PubMed, OVID MEDLINE, PsycINFO (EBSCO), CINAHL (EBSCO), OVID HealthStar, EMBASE (Elsevier), and Cochrane Databases. Studies were included if the correlation coefficients [Pearson (rp) or Spearman (rs)] between adherences measured by both MEMS and SRQs were available or could be calculated from other statistics in the articles. Data were independently abstracted in duplicate with standardized protocol and abstraction form including 1) first author's name; 2) year of publication; 3) disease status of participants; 4) sample size; 5) mean age (year); 6) duration of trials (month); 7) SRQ names if available; 8) adherence (%) measured by MEMS; 9) adherence (%) measured by SRQ; 10) correlation coefficient and relative information, including p-value, 95% confidence interval (CI). A meta-analysis was conducted to pool the correlation coefficients using random-effect model. Eleven studies (N = 1,684 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The mean of adherence measured by MEMS was 74.9% (range 53.4%-92.9%), versus 84.0% by SRQ (range 68.35%-95%). The correlation between adherence measured by MEMS and SRQs ranged from 0.24 to 0.87. The pooled correlation coefficient for 11 studies was 0.45 (p = 0.001, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.34-0.56). The subgroup meta-analysis on the seven studies reporting rp and four studies reporting rs reported the pooled correlation coefficient: 0.46 (p = 0.011, 95% CI: 0.33-0.59) and 0.43 (p = 0.0038, 95% CI: 0.23-0.64), respectively. No differences were found for other subgroup analyses. Medication adherence measured by MEMS and SRQs tends to be at least moderately correlated, suggesting that SRQs give a good estimate of medication adherence.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
Goetghebeur, E;Vansteelandt, S
通讯作者：
Vansteelandt, S
DOI：
10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2
发表时间：
1986-09-01
期刊：
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS
影响因子：
--
作者：
DERSIMONIAN, R;LAIRD, N
通讯作者：
LAIRD, N
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Byerly, Matthew J.;Nakonezny, Paul A.;Rush, A. John
通讯作者：
Rush, A. John
影响因子：
3
作者：
Garber, MC;Nau, DP;Lawrence, JB
通讯作者：
Lawrence, JB
影响因子：
2.1
作者：
Cook, Christopher L.;Wade, William E.;Perri, Matthew, III
通讯作者：
Perri, Matthew, III