Measuring Medication Adherence

Are Missed Doses Reported More Accurately Then Perfect Adherence?

Glenn Wagner, Judith Godwin Rabkin

ResearchPosted on rand.org 2000Published in: AIDS Care, v. 12, no. 4, 2000, p. 405-408

Self-reports overestimate adherence compared to more objective measures such as electronic monitoring. However, self-report is the most feasible method for clinical settings; therefore, it is important to identify the context in which this method can provide an accurate assessment. To address whether self-reports are more accurate when missed doses are reported, the authors conducted a secondary analysis of data from a methodological study comparing multiple measures of adherence (including self-report and electronic monitoring to a two-week placebo regimen mimicking HAART among 30 HIV-positive patients not on HAART. Results indicated a mean adherence of 85% and 62%, as measured by se4f-report and electronic monitoring respectively. Self-report and electronic monitoring were not significantly correlated in the measurement of proportion of prescribed doses taken among the sub-group of 17 patients who reported missed doses (r = 0. 22), nor among those who reported no missed doses, or the group as a whole. Using electronic monitoring as the validity criterion, these findings indicate that self-reports overestimate adherence even among patients who report missed doses.

Topics

Document Details

  • Availability: Non-RAND
  • Year: 2000
  • Pages: 4
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/pubs
  • Document Number: EP-200000-17

This publication is part of the RAND external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.