Why the study?
It was unclear whether single-pill combinations of antihypertensive drugs actually improve medication adherence in a real-world setting using representative national data.
Do single-pill combinations of ARB/CCB improve medication adherence (MPR) compared to multiple-pill combinations or monotherapy in patients prescribed antihypertensive drugs?
Do single-pill combinations of ARB/CCB improve medication adherence (MPR) compared to multiple-pill combinations or monotherapy in patients prescribed antihypertensive drugs?
Single-pill combinations of antihypertensive medications significantly improve medication adherence compared to multiple-pill regimens, particularly in older patients and those with higher pill burdens.
Should not yet change practice; leaves open whether SPC-associated adherence gains improve BP control or CV outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: We tried to clarify, by using representative national data in a real-world setting, whether single-pill combinations (SPCs) of antihypertensives actually improve medication adherence. DESIGN: A nationwide population-based study. SETTING: We used a 2.2% cohort (n=1 048 061) of the total population (n=46 605 433) that was randomly extracted by National Health Insurance of Korea from 2008 to 2013. PARTICIPANTS: We included patients (n=116 677) who were prescribed with the same antihypertensive drugs for at least 1 year and divided them into groups of angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB)-only, calcium channel blocker (CCB)-only, multiple-pill combinations (MPCs) and SPCs of ARB/CCB. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Medication possession ratio (MPR), a frequently used indirect measurement method of medication adherence. RESULTS: Adjusted MPR was higher in combination therapy (89.7% in SPC, 87.2% in MPC) than monotherapy (81.6% in ARB, 79.7% in CCB), and MPR of SPC (89.7%, 95% CI 89.3 to 90.0) was higher than MPR of MPC (87.2%, 95% CI 86.7 to 87.7) (p<0.05). In subgroup analysis, adherence of SPC and MPC was 92.3% (95% CI 91.5 to 93.0) vs 88.1% (95% CI 87.1 to 89.0) in those aged 65-74 years and 89.3% (95% CI 88.0 to 90.7) vs 84.8% (95% CI 83.3 to 92.0) in those ≥75 years (p<0.05). According to total pill numbers, adherence of SPC and MPC was 90.9% (CI 89.8 to 92.0) vs 85.3% (95% CI 84.1 to 86.5) in seven to eight pills and 91.2% (95% CI 89.3 to 93.1) vs 82.5% (95% CI 80.6 to 84.4) in nine or more (p<0.05). The adherence difference between SPC and MPC started to increase at five to six pills and at age 50-64 years (p<0.05). When analysed according to elderly status, the adherence difference started to increase at three to four pills in the elderly (≥65 years) and at five to six in the non-elderly group (20-64 years) (p<0.05). These differences all widened further with increasing age and the total medications. CONCLUSION: SPC regimens demonstrated higher adherence than MPC, and this tendency is more pronounced with increasing age and the total number of medications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: