Key result
Adherence measured by PDC is independently associated with 1-year mortality in heart failure.
Why the study?
There is no gold standard method to calculate medication adherence using administrative drug data in heart failure patients.
Does the proportion of days covered (PDC) method better predict subsequent mortality in heart failure patients compared to MPR or MPRm?
Population
4234 heart failure patients who survived 1 year post-hospitalization in Western Australia
Comparison
Proportion of days covered vs medication possession ratio and modified medication possession ratio
Design
Population-based cohort study using linked administrative data
Follow-up
1 year post-landmark period
Authors
Loading...
PDC may refine adherence assessment in HF; hypothesis-generating for mortality prediction and requires prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Cohort (n=4,234)
Does the proportion of days covered (PDC) method better predict subsequent mortality in heart failure patients compared to MPR or MPRm?
p-value: p=≤ .02
The proportion of days covered (PDC) provides a more conservative estimate of medication adherence than MPR or MPRm and is a more consistent predictor of subsequent mortality in heart failure patients.
Qin et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in heart failure (n=4,234). Medication adherence measured by proportion of days covered (PDC) vs. Medication possession ratio (MPR) and modified MPR (MPRm) was evaluated on 1-year all-cause death (p=≤ .02). Proportion of days covered (PDC) provided a more conservative estimate of adherence than MPR or MPRm and was independently associated with 1-year mortality in heart failure patients (P≤.02).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: