World Rural Health Conference
Home Print this page Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Users Online: 456
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents 
LETTER TO EDITOR
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 171-172  

Methods for estimating medication adherence to antiretroviral therapy: Response to Mehta et al. (2016)


Department of Community Medicine, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, India

Date of Web Publication18-Sep-2017

Correspondence Address:
Saurav Basu
Department of Community Medicine, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_9_17

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Basu S, Garg S. Methods for estimating medication adherence to antiretroviral therapy: Response to Mehta et al. (2016). J Family Med Prim Care 2017;6:171-2

How to cite this URL:
Basu S, Garg S. Methods for estimating medication adherence to antiretroviral therapy: Response to Mehta et al. (2016). J Family Med Prim Care [serial online] 2017 [cited 2019 Oct 19];6:171-2. Available from: http://www.jfmpc.com/text.asp?2017/6/1/171/214993

Dear Editor,

We went through with considerable interest, the article by Mehta et al. regarding adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) medications among people living with HIV (PLHIV) undergoing treatment in an ART clinic.[1] The research is of considerable importance since the extent of adherence to ART among PLHIV determines the quality of life and patient survival.[2] We request certain clarifications with regard to the methodology employed which would aid future researchers since the measurement of medication adherence in HIV/AIDS patients on ART is complex and no gold standard exists.[3] The authors have reported the drug adherence rate as the percentage of prescribed doses of the ART medication taken by the patient in the previous 30 days. However, the method used to query the information for estimation of the number of pills missed by the patient has not been reported by the authors. There are several methods which could have been potentially used for assessing medication adherence in the study site, which are described below.[3],[4]

  1. Self-reported (percentage) adherence: The patient is asked to report the number of days, in which there were episodes of missed medication during a specified period
  2. Self-reported adherence through a validated questionnaire like Aids Clinical Trial Group: A four-item self-administered questionnaire is used for assessing patient medication adherence in the previous 7 days [5]


These self-reported adherence measures are simple to administer while permitting a rapid assessment of medication adherence. Nevertheless, they also tend to overestimate the rate of adherence [5] due to self-desirability bias of the patient. Moreover, the results are subject to recall bias particularly when the specified duration for the recall is long.

  1. Prescription refill records: It may be used to evaluate medication adherence by calculating the medication possession ratio for the period from index fill to subsequently the next refill
  2. Pill count method: The medication bottle or strips dispensed during the previous visit are brought by the patient. The number of pills taken is calculated by subtracting the count of the number of pills remaining from the total number of pills dispensed. The drug adherence rate is then calculated by dividing the number of pills taken by number of days elapsed since the last dispense.


Both the above methods for assessing medication adherence have several limitations. They only determine the possession of medication and not actual consumption by the patient. Moreover, their accuracy is also subject to the patient affirming having run out of the drug stocks and not having made any retail purchase of the medications during the intervening period, which is neither procedurally difficult nor uncommon in the context of Indian healthcare settings.

A further limitation of the study is the lack of use of multiple methods for the assessment of medication adherence in the HIV patients which is the recommended methodology.[2],[5]

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Mehta KG, Baxi R, Patel S, Parmar M. Drug adherence rate and loss to follow-up among people living with HIV/AIDS attending an ART centre in a tertiary government hospital in Western India. J Family Med Prim Care 2016;5:266-9.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
2.
Sabatâe E. Adherence to Long-Term Therapies: Evidence for Action. 1st ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Chesney MA. The elusive gold standard. Future perspectives for HIV adherence assessment and intervention. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2006;43 Suppl 1:S149-55.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]    
4.
Simoni JM, Kurth AE, Pearson CR, Pantalone DW, Merrill JO, Frick PA. Self-report measures of antiretroviral therapy adherence: A review with recommendations for HIV research and clinical management. AIDS Behav 2006;10:227-45.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]    
5.
Bezabhe WM, Peterson GM, Bereznicki L, Chalmers L, Gee P. Adherence to antiretroviral drug therapy in adult patients who are HIV-positive in Northwest Ethiopia: A study protocol. BMJ Open 2013;3:e003559.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]    




 

Top
   
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
   References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed684    
    Printed7    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded69    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal