A comparison between antihypertensive medication adherence and treatment intensification as potential clinical performance measures

Medication adherence among persons with coronary heart disease and associations with blood pressure and low-density-lipoprotein-cholesterol

Purpose

To describe medication adherence to lipid-lowering drugs (LLDs), antihypertensive drugs, and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) among persons with coronary heart disease (CHD) and explore its association with low-density-lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure.

Methods

Based on record linkage between the seventh wave of the Tromsø Study and the Norwegian Prescription Database, medication adherence was calculated as the proportion of days covered (PDC) for persistent prevalent users in the period of 365 days before the attendance date. Multivariable linear regression models were used to assess the association between systolic and diastolic blood pressure and medication nonadherence to antihypertensive drugs, age, sex, lifestyle, body mass index (BMI), current and previous diabetes, and between LDL-cholesterol and medication nonadherence to LLDs, age, sex, lifestyle, BMI, and current and previous diabetes.

Results

Mean PDC was 0.94 for LLDs and antihypertensive drugs and 0.97 for ASA. Among persons with PDC ≥ 0.80 for LLDs, 12.0% had an LDL-cholesterol < 1.8 mmol/L. Blood pressure < 140/90 mmHg (< 140/80 mmHg if diabetes patient) was reached by 55.1% of those with a PDC ≥ 0.80 for antihypertensive drugs. Adherence to LLDs was associated with lower LDL-cholesterol, while neither systolic nor diastolic blood pressure was associated with adherence to antihypertensive drugs.

Conclusion

Adherence to antihypertensive drugs, LLDs, and ASA among persons with CHD were high despite low achievement of treatment goals for blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol. There was a statistically significant association between adherence to LLDs and LDL-cholesterol, but not between adherence to antihypertensive drugs and blood pressure.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-022-03276-4.

Treatment Intensification for Elevated Blood Pressure and Risk of Recurrent Stroke

Background

It remains unclear whether physicians' attitudes toward timely management of elevated blood pressure affect the risk of stroke recurrence.

Methods and Results

From a multicenter stroke registry database, we identified 2933 patients with acute ischemic stroke who were admitted to participating centers in 2011, survived at the 1‐year follow‐up period, and returned to outpatient clinics ≥2 times after discharge. As a surrogate measure of physicians' attitude, individual treatment intensification (TI) scores were calculated by dividing the difference between the frequencies of observed and expected medication changes by the frequency of clinic visits and categorizing them into 5 groups. The association between TI groups and the recurrence of stroke within 1 year was analyzed using hierarchical frailty models, with adjustment for clustering within each hospital and relevant covariates. Mean±SD of the TI score was −0.13±0.28. The TI score groups were significantly associated with increased risk of recurrent stroke compared with Group 3 (TI score range, −0.25 to 0); Group 1 (range, −1 to −0.5), adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 13.43 (95% CI, 5.95–30.35); Group 2 (range, −0.5 to −0.25), adjusted HR 4.59 (95% CI, 2.01–10.46); and Group 4 (TI score 0), adjusted HR 6.60 (95% CI, 3.02–14.45); but not with Group 5 (range, 0–1), adjusted HR 1.68 (95% CI, 0.62–4.56). This elevated risk in the lowest TI score groups persisted when confining analysis to those with hypertension, history of blood pressure‐lowering medication, no atrial fibrillation, and regular clinic visits and stratifying the subjects by functional capacity at discharge.

Conclusions

A low TI score, which implies physicians' therapeutic inertia in blood pressure management, was associated with a higher risk of recurrent stroke. The TI score may be a useful performance indicator in the outpatient clinic setting to prevent recurrent stroke.

Clinic-Based Strategies to Reach United States Million Hearts 2022 Blood Pressure Control Goals

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Million Hearts initiative includes an ambitious ≥80% blood pressure control goal in US adults with hypertension by 2022. We used the validated Blood Pressure Control Model to quantify changes in clinic-based hypertension management processes needed to attain ≥80% blood pressure control.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Blood Pressure Control Model simulates patient blood pressures weekly using 3 key modifiable hypertension management processes: office visit frequency, clinician treatment intensification given uncontrolled blood pressure, and continued antihypertensive medication use (medication adherence rate). We compared blood pressure control rates (using the Seventh Joint National Committee on hypertension targets) achieved over 4 years between usual care and the best-observed values for management processes identified from the literature (1-week return visit interval, 20%-44% intensification rate, and 76% adherence rate). We determined the management process values needed to achieve ≥80% blood pressure control in US adults. In adults with uncontrolled blood pressure, usual care achieved 45.6% control (95% uncertainty interval, 39.6%-52.5%) and literature-based best-observed values achieved 79.7% control (95% uncertainty interval, 79.3%-80.1%) over 4 years. Increasing treatment intensification rates to 62% of office visits with an uncontrolled blood pressure resulted in ≥80% blood pressure control, even when the return visit interval and adherence remained at usual care values. Improving to best-observed values for all 3 management processes would achieve 78.1% blood pressure control in the overall US population with hypertension, approaching the ≥80% Million Hearts 2022 goal.

CONCLUSIONS

Achieving the Million Hearts blood pressure control goal by 2022 will require simultaneously increasing visit frequency, overcoming therapeutic inertia, and improving patient medication adherence. As the relative importance of each of these 3 processes will depend on local characteristics, simulation models like the Blood Pressure Control Model can help local healthcare systems tailor strategies to reach local and national benchmarks.

A substudy evaluating treatment intensification on medication adherence among hypertensive patients receiving home blood pressure telemonitoring and pharmacist management

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Hypertension is a leading cause of death and major contributor to heart attacks, strokes, heart and kidney failure. Antihypertensive (HTN medication) non-adherence contributes to uncontrolled hypertension. Effective initiatives to improve uncontrolled hypertension include a team-based approach with home blood pressure (BP) monitoring. Our study objective was to evaluate whether objectively measured medication adherence was influenced by home BP telemonitoring and pharmacist management.

METHODS

We analysed HTN medication adherence in 240 patients who received home BP telemonitoring and pharmacist intervention (TI). Adherence was measured based on prescription fills and the proportion of days covered (PDC). HTN medications continued pre- to post-baseline were similar for telemonitoring intervention (TI) and usual care (UC) patients (rate ratio = 1·00, P = 0·90).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

More HTN medications were discontinued pre- to post-baseline in TI patients (rate ratio = 1·38, P = 0·04). Similarly, more HTN medications were added in TI patients (rate ratio = 2·46, P < 0·001). The proportion with a mean PDC ≥ 0·8 for HTN medications added after baseline and overall adherence did not differ between groups.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Medication adherence was high in both groups; however, medication adherence was not significantly altered by the intervention. There were more medication modifications and greater medication intensification among TI patients.

Concordance between two methods in measuring treatment adherence in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

We analyzed the concordance between two methods for measuring treatment adherence (TA) and studied the determinants of TA in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional descriptive study in a primary care center, involving 320 diabetic patients. TA was measured using the Haynes-Sackett (H-S) adherence test during the patient interview and based on pharmacy refill data. TA was calculated globally and by drug groups (antihypertensive, lipid-lowering, and antidiabetic drugs).

RESULTS

Poor TA as measured by the H-S test was observed in 11.2% of the patients. Based on pharmacy refill data, there was a poor global TA rate of 30.3%, which was 33.3%, 26.6%, and 34.2% for oral antidiabetic, antihypertensive, and lipid-lowering drugs, respectively. Concordance between the two methods was poor. There was no relationship between the degree of disease control and TA as measured by the H-S test. Good TA measured based on pharmacy refill data for antidiabetic and antihypertensive drugs was associated with lower glycosylated hemoglobin and diastolic blood pressure values, respectively. Patients with good global TA showed lower glycosylated hemoglobin, diastolic blood pressure, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol values. The multivariate analysis found good oral antidiabetic adherence to be associated to free pharmacy service; good antihypertensive drug adherence to the existence of comorbidities; and good lipid-lowering drug adherence to a history of ischemic heart disease, and a more experienced physician and/or female physician.

CONCLUSION

Concordance between the two methods in assessing TA was low. Approximately one-third of the patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus presented poor TA in relation to antihypertensive, lipid-lowering, and antidiabetic medication. An improved TA was associated with a better control of the studied parameters. Comorbidities, such as ischemic heart disease and access to free pharmacy service, were identified as determinants of good TA.

Simulating Strategies for Improving Control of Hypertension Among Patients with Usual Source of Care in the United States: The Blood Pressure Control Model

BACKGROUND

Only half of hypertensive adults achieve blood pressure (BP) control in the United States, and it is unclear how BP control rates may be improved most effectively and efficiently at the population level.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare the potential effects of system-wide isolated improvements in medication adherence, visit frequency, and higher physician prescription rate on achieving BP control at 52 weeks.

DESIGN

We developed a Markov microsimulation model of patient-level, physician-level, and system-level processes involved in controlling hypertension with medications. The model is informed by data from national surveys, cohort studies and trials, and was validated against two multicenter clinical trials (ALLHAT and VALUE).

SUBJECTS

We studied a simulated, nationally representative cohort of patients with diagnosed but uncontrolled hypertension with a usual source of care.

INTERVENTIONS

We simulated a base case and improvements of 10 and 50%, and an ideal scenario for three modifiable parameters: visit frequency, treatment intensification, and medication adherence. Ideal scenarios were defined as 100% for treatment intensification and adherence, and return visits occurring within 4 weeks of an elevated office systolic BP.

MAIN OUTCOME

BP control at 52 weeks of follow-up was examined.

RESULTS

Among 25,000 hypothetical adult patients with uncontrolled hypertension (systolic BP ≥ 140 mmHg), only 18% achieved BP control after 52 weeks using base-case assumptions. With 10/50%/idealized enhancements in each isolated parameter, enhanced treatment intensification achieved the greatest BP control (19/23/71%), compared with enhanced visit frequency (19/21/35%) and medication adherence (19/23/26%). When all three processes were idealized, the model predicted a BP control rate of 95% at 52 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Substantial improvements in BP control can only be achieved through major improvements in processes of care. Healthcare systems may achieve greater success by increasing the frequency of clinical encounters and improving physicians' prescribing behavior than by attempting to improve patient adherence to medications.

Pharmacist intervention for blood pressure control: medication intensification and adherence

The objective of this study was to describe medication adherence and medication intensification in a physician-pharmacist collaborative management (PPCM) model compared with usual care. This study was a prospective, cluster, randomized study in 32 primary care offices from 15 states. The primary outcomes were medication adherence and anti-hypertensive medication changes during the first 9 months of the intervention. The 9-month visit was completed by 539 patients, 345 of which received the intervention. There was no significant difference between intervention and usual care patients in regards to medication adherence at 9 months. Intervention patients received significantly more medication changes (4.9 vs.1.1; P = .0003) and had significantly increased use of diuretics and aldosterone antagonists when compared with usual care (P = .01).The PPCM model increased medication intensification; however, no significant change in medication adherence was detected. PPCM models will need to develop non-adherence identification and intervention methods to further improve the potency of the care team.

Check it, change it: a community-based, multifaceted intervention to improve blood pressure control

BACKGROUND

Although home blood pressure (BP) monitoring interventions have shown potential in selected populations, it is unclear whether such strategies can be generalized. We sought to determine whether a multifaceted BP control program that uses a web-based health portal (Heart360), community health coaches, and physician assistant guidance could improve hypertension control in a diverse community setting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between September 12, 2010, and November 11, 2011 Check It, Change It, a community-based hypertension quality improvement program, enrolled 1756 patients with hypertension from 8 clinics in Durham County, NC. The Check It, Change It community intervention was evaluated using a prepost study design without a concurrent control. Participants were stratified into 3 tiers according to their initial BP: tier 0 (BP <140/90 mm Hg)=51% of population, tier 1 (BP=140/90-159/99 mm Hg)=30% of total, and tier 2 (BP ≥159/99 mm Hg)=19% of total. Overall, median age was 59 years (interquartile range, 49-69), 67% were female, and 76% black. After 6 months, the mean overall systolic BP declined 4.7 mm Hg. Rates of achieving target BP control (<140/90) increased overall from 51% at baseline to 63% by 6 months, and 69% had either reached their BP target or had reduced their baseline systolic BP by 10 mm Hg or more.

CONCLUSIONS

A multicomponent-tiered hypertension program was associated with improved BP control in a diverse community-based population.

Is high-intensity statin therapy associated with lower statin adherence compared with low- to moderate-intensity statin therapy? Implications of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Cholesterol Management Guidelines

BACKGROUND

The recent cholesterol guideline recommends high-intensity statins in cardiovascular disease (CVD) patients. High-intensity statins are associated with more frequent side effects. Therefore, it may be of concern that these recommendations might reduce statin adherence.

HYPOTHESIS

High-intensity statins are associated with lower adherence compared with low- to moderate-intensity statins.

METHODS

In a national database of 972,532 CVD patients from the Veterans Health Administration, we identified patients receiving statins between October 1, 2010, and September 30, 2011. We assessed statin adherence by calculating proportion of days covered (PDC) and determined whether high-intensity statin therapy was independently associated with a lower PDC.

RESULTS

Statins were prescribed in 629,005 (64.7%). Of those, 229,437 (36.5%) received high-intensity statins. Mean PDC (0.87 vs 0.86, P < 0.0001) and patients with PDC ≥ 0.80 (76.3% vs 74.2%, P < 0.0001) were slightly higher for those receiving low- to moderate-intensity compared with high-intensity statins. In adjusted analyses, high-intensity statin use was associated with a significant but modest PDC reduction compared with low- to moderate-intensity statin use, whether PDC was assessed as a continuous (β-coefficient: -0.008, P < 0.0001) or categorical (PDC ≥ 0.80 [odds ratio: 0.94, 95% confidence interval: 0.93-0.96]) measure of statin adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

An approach of high-intensity statin therapy will lead to a significant practice change, as the majority of CVD patients are not on high-intensity therapy. However, this change may be associated with a very modest reduction in statin adherence compared with low- to moderate-intensity therapy that is unlikely to be of clinical significance.