77
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Impact of Treatment Noncompliance on Mortality in People With Type 2 Diabetes

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          OBJECTIVE

          To assess the association of compliance with treatment (medication and clinic appointments) and all-cause mortality in people with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.

          RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

          Data were extracted from U.K. general practice records and included patients ( N = 15,984) who had diagnostic codes indicative of type 2 diabetes or who had received a prescription for an oral antidiabetic agent and were treated with insulin. Records in the 30 months before the index date were inspected for clinical codes (recorded at consultation) indicating medication noncompliance or medical appointment nonattendance. Noncompliance was defined as missing more than one scheduled visit or having at least one provider code for not taking medications as prescribed. Relative survival postindex date was compared by determining progression to all-cause mortality using Cox proportional hazards models.

          RESULTS

          Those identified as clinic nonattenders were more likely to be smokers, younger, have higher HbA 1c, and have more prior primary care contacts and greater morbidity ( P < 0.001). Those identified as medication noncompliers were more likely to be women ( P = 0.001), smokers ( P = 0.014), and have higher HbA 1c, more prior primary care contacts, and greater morbidity (all P < 0.001). After adjustment for confounding factors, medication noncompliance (hazard ratio 1.579 [95% CI 1.167–2.135]), clinic nonattendance of one or two missed appointments (1.163 [1.042–1.299]), and clinic nonattendance of greater than two missed appointments (1.605 [1.356–1.900]) were independent risk factors for all-cause mortality.

          CONCLUSIONS

          Medication noncompliance and clinic nonattendance, assessed during routine care by primary care physicians or their staff, were independently associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Correlates of Insulin Injection Omission

          OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to assess factors associated with patient frequency of intentionally skipping insulin injections. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Data were obtained through an Internet survey of 502 U.S. adults self-identified as taking insulin by injection to treat type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Multiple regression analysis assessed independent associations of various demographic, disease, and injection-specific factors with insulin omission. RESULTS Intentional insulin omission was reported by more than half of respondents; regular omission was reported by 20%. Significant independent risk factors for insulin omission were younger age, lower income and higher education, type 2 diabetes, not following a healthy diet, taking more daily injections, interference of injections with daily activities, and injection pain and embarrassment. Risk factors differed between type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients, with diet nonadherence more prominent in type 1 diabetes and age, education, income, pain, and embarrassment more prominent in type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS Whereas most patients did not report regular intentional omission of insulin injections, a substantial number did. Our findings suggest that it is important to identify patients who intentionally omit insulin and be aware of the potential risk factors identified here. For patients who report injection-related problems (interference with daily activities, injection pain, and embarrassment), providers should consider recommending strategies and tools for addressing these problems to increase adherence to prescribed insulin regimens. This could improve clinical outcomes.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Self-monitoring of blood glucose levels and glycemic control: the Northern California Kaiser Permanente Diabetes registry.

            We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of self-monitoring blood glucose levels to improve glycemic control. A cohort design was used to assess the relation between self-monitoring frequency (1996 average daily glucometer strip utilization) and the first glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level measured in 1997. The study sample included 24,312 adult patients with diabetes who were members of a large, group model, managed care organization. We estimated the difference between HbA1c levels in patients who self-monitored at frequencies recommended by the American Diabetes Association compared with those who monitored less frequently or not at all. Models were adjusted for age, sex, race, education, occupation, income, duration of diabetes, medication refill adherence, clinic appointment "no show" rate, annual eye exam attendance, use of nonpharmacological (diet and exercise) diabetes therapy, smoking, alcohol consumption, hospitalization and emergency room visits, and the number of daily insulin injections. Self-monitoring among patients with type 1 diabetes (> or = 3 times daily) and pharmacologically treated type 2 diabetes (at least daily) was associated with lower HbA1c levels (1.0 percentage points lower in type 1 diabetes and 0.6 points lower in type 2 diabetes) than was less frequent monitoring (P < 0.0001). Although there are no specific recommendations for patients with nonpharmacologically treated type 2 diabetes, those who practiced self-monitoring (at any frequency) had a 0.4 point lower HbA1c level than those not practicing at all (P < 0.0001). More frequent self-monitoring of blood glucose levels was associated with clinically and statistically better glycemic control regardless of diabetes type or therapy. These findings support the clinical recommendations suggested by the American Diabetes Association.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Adherence to pharmacologic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

              Many patients who have type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) require several different medications. Although these agents can substantially reduce diabetes-related morbidity and mortality, the extent of treatment benefits may be limited by a lack of treatment adherence. Unfortunately, little information is available on treatment adherence in patients with type 2 DM. Available data indicate substantial opportunity for improving clinical outcomes through improved treatment adherence. Factors that appear to influence adherence include the patient's comprehension of the treatment regimen and its benefits, adverse effects, medication costs, and regimen complexity, as well as the patient's emotional well-being. Outcomes research emphasizes the importance of effective patient-provider communication in overcoming some of the barriers to adherence. This article offers specific suggestions for improving adherence in patients with type 2 DM seen in general clinical practice.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Diabetes Care
                Diabetes Care
                diacare
                dcare
                Diabetes Care
                Diabetes Care
                American Diabetes Association
                0149-5992
                1935-5548
                June 2012
                11 May 2012
                : 35
                : 6
                : 1279-1284
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, U.K.
                [2] 2Loyola University Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland
                [3] 3School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
                [4] 4Global Epidemiology, Pharmatelligence, Cardiff, Wales, U.K.
                [5] 5Point of Care Medical Consulting, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [6] 6Department of Medicine, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, Wales, U.K.
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Craig J. Currie, currie@ 123456cardiff.ac.uk .
                Article
                1277
                10.2337/dc11-1277
                3357221
                22511257
                0ff0a363-2516-4930-a707-e4d1bbd4b853
                © 2012 by the American Diabetes Association.

                Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.

                History
                : 5 July 2011
                : 19 February 2012
                Categories
                Original Research
                Epidemiology/Health Services Research

                Endocrinology & Diabetes
                Endocrinology & Diabetes

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log