Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23755014›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2013

Does the use of an electronic reminder device with or without counseling improve adherence to lipid-lowering treatment? The results of a randomized controlled trial.

M J Kooy, B L G van Wijk, E R Heerdink, A de Boer, M L Bouvy

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Interventions to improve adherence to lipid-lowering medication.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M J KooyDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University Utrecht, Netherlands.
B L G van Wijk
E R Heerdink
A de Boer
M L Bouvy
Utrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLipid-lowering treatment with statins has proven to be effective in reducing cardiovascular events and mortality. In daily practice, however, adherence to medication is often low and this compromises the therapeutic effect. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of an electronic reminder device (ERD) with or without counseling to improve refill adherence and persistence for statin treatment in non-adherent patients.

methodsA multicenter, community pharmacy-based, randomized controlled trial was conducted in 24 pharmacies in the Netherlands among patients with pre-baseline refill adherence rates between 50 and 80%. Eligible patients aged 65 years or older were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: (1) counseling with an ERD (n = 134), (2) ERD with a written instruction (n = 131), and a (3) control group that received the usual treatment (n = 134).

main outcome measurerefill adherence to statin treatment for a 360-day period after inclusion (PDC360). Patients with a refill rate ≥80% were considered adherent. The effect among subgroups was also assessed.

resultsThere were no relevant differences at baseline. In the counseling with ERD group 54 of 130 eligible patients received the counseling with ERD. In the ERD group, 117 of 123 eligible patients received the ERD. The proportions of adherent patients in the counseling with ERD-group (69.2%) and in the ERD group (72.4%) were not higher than in the control group (64.8%). Among women using statins for secondary prevention, more patients were adherent in the ERD group (86.1%) than in the control group (52.6%) (p < 0.005). In men using statins for secondary prevention the ERD was found to have no effect.

conclusionIn this randomized controlled trial, no statistically significant improvement of refill adherence was found if an ERD was used with or without counseling. However, in a subgroup of women using statins for secondary prevention the ERD did improve adherence significantly.

Indexed as

electronic reminder deviceinterventionmedication adherencepharmacy

Identifiers

PMID23755014
PMCPMC3665928
OpenAlexW2134375450

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.