Comparing objective measures of adherence to HIV antiretroviral therapy: Electronic medication monitors and unannounced pill counts

David R. Bangsberg

doi:10.1023/A:1011396711486

Comparing objective measures of adherence to HIV antiretroviral therapy: Electronic medication monitors and unannounced pill counts

David R. Bangsberg

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

165 Scopus citations

Abstract

We compared electronic medication monitoring and electronic monitoring adjusted by interview with an unannounced pill-count adherence measure, in a cross-sectional analysis “n = 42”. We used the following measures “a” electronic monitored doses “EMD: # medication monitor openings/# doses prescribed”, “b” adjusted electronically monitored doses “AEMD: EMD adjusted by the number of extra openings and extra doses removed”, “c” percentage of days dose taken “PDDT: % days the medication monitor was opened at least once, and “d” unannounced pill count “PC”. The results showed that AEMD, EMD, and PDDT were significantly associated with PC adherence. AEMD explained 83% of the variation in PC adherence, EMD 49%, and PDDT 58%. EMD adherence was significantly lower than PC adherence “p = .02”. Electronic medication monitoring measures were closely related to PC adherence. AEMD was more closely associated than EMD or PDDT. EMD may underestimate adherence due to the removal of multiple doses from the bottle at one time.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	275-281
Number of pages	7
Journal	AIDS and Behavior
Volume	5
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011396711486
State	Published - Sep 2001
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Adherence
Drug use
Electronic medication monitoring
HIV
Highly active antiretroviral therapy
Homeless
MEMS
Pill count

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Social Psychology
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Infectious Diseases

Access to Document

10.1023/A:1011396711486

Cite this

@article{e416c2a29a8541c981aba454c5c2647c,

title = "Comparing objective measures of adherence to HIV antiretroviral therapy: Electronic medication monitors and unannounced pill counts",

abstract = "We compared electronic medication monitoring and electronic monitoring adjusted by interview with an unannounced pill-count adherence measure, in a cross-sectional analysis “n = 42”. We used the following measures “a” electronic monitored doses “EMD: # medication monitor openings/# doses prescribed”, “b” adjusted electronically monitored doses “AEMD: EMD adjusted by the number of extra openings and extra doses removed”, “c” percentage of days dose taken “PDDT: % days the medication monitor was opened at least once, and “d” unannounced pill count “PC”. The results showed that AEMD, EMD, and PDDT were significantly associated with PC adherence. AEMD explained 83% of the variation in PC adherence, EMD 49%, and PDDT 58%. EMD adherence was significantly lower than PC adherence “p = .02”. Electronic medication monitoring measures were closely related to PC adherence. AEMD was more closely associated than EMD or PDDT. EMD may underestimate adherence due to the removal of multiple doses from the bottle at one time.",

keywords = "Adherence, Drug use, Electronic medication monitoring, HIV, Highly active antiretroviral therapy, Homeless, MEMS, Pill count",

author = "Bangsberg, {David R.}",

note = "Funding Information: The authors acknowledge Ms. Paula Zenti, Ms. Johanna Crane and Ms. Maureen Morgan for conducting the patient adherence assessments; Ms. Nelia Dela Cruz, Mr. John Day, and Mr. Jason Bonafacio for assisting with the REACH Cohort; and Mr. Richard Clark for directing the REACH Cohort. All participants provided informed consent and the study was approved by the University of California, San Francisco Committee on Human Research. This study was funded by NIMH #58985-01, NIMH #54907-04A1, the University-Wide AIDS Research Program Award #R97-SF-1104, the Center for AIDS Research Award #P30 MH59037, and The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.",

year = "2001",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1023/A:1011396711486",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "5",

pages = "275--281",

journal = "AIDS and Behavior",

issn = "1090-7165",

publisher = "Springer New York",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing objective measures of adherence to HIV antiretroviral therapy

T2 - Electronic medication monitors and unannounced pill counts

AU - Bangsberg, David R.

N1 - Funding Information: The authors acknowledge Ms. Paula Zenti, Ms. Johanna Crane and Ms. Maureen Morgan for conducting the patient adherence assessments; Ms. Nelia Dela Cruz, Mr. John Day, and Mr. Jason Bonafacio for assisting with the REACH Cohort; and Mr. Richard Clark for directing the REACH Cohort. All participants provided informed consent and the study was approved by the University of California, San Francisco Committee on Human Research. This study was funded by NIMH #58985-01, NIMH #54907-04A1, the University-Wide AIDS Research Program Award #R97-SF-1104, the Center for AIDS Research Award #P30 MH59037, and The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.

PY - 2001/9

Y1 - 2001/9

N2 - We compared electronic medication monitoring and electronic monitoring adjusted by interview with an unannounced pill-count adherence measure, in a cross-sectional analysis “n = 42”. We used the following measures “a” electronic monitored doses “EMD: # medication monitor openings/# doses prescribed”, “b” adjusted electronically monitored doses “AEMD: EMD adjusted by the number of extra openings and extra doses removed”, “c” percentage of days dose taken “PDDT: % days the medication monitor was opened at least once, and “d” unannounced pill count “PC”. The results showed that AEMD, EMD, and PDDT were significantly associated with PC adherence. AEMD explained 83% of the variation in PC adherence, EMD 49%, and PDDT 58%. EMD adherence was significantly lower than PC adherence “p = .02”. Electronic medication monitoring measures were closely related to PC adherence. AEMD was more closely associated than EMD or PDDT. EMD may underestimate adherence due to the removal of multiple doses from the bottle at one time.

AB - We compared electronic medication monitoring and electronic monitoring adjusted by interview with an unannounced pill-count adherence measure, in a cross-sectional analysis “n = 42”. We used the following measures “a” electronic monitored doses “EMD: # medication monitor openings/# doses prescribed”, “b” adjusted electronically monitored doses “AEMD: EMD adjusted by the number of extra openings and extra doses removed”, “c” percentage of days dose taken “PDDT: % days the medication monitor was opened at least once, and “d” unannounced pill count “PC”. The results showed that AEMD, EMD, and PDDT were significantly associated with PC adherence. AEMD explained 83% of the variation in PC adherence, EMD 49%, and PDDT 58%. EMD adherence was significantly lower than PC adherence “p = .02”. Electronic medication monitoring measures were closely related to PC adherence. AEMD was more closely associated than EMD or PDDT. EMD may underestimate adherence due to the removal of multiple doses from the bottle at one time.

KW - Adherence

KW - Drug use

KW - Electronic medication monitoring

KW - HIV

KW - Highly active antiretroviral therapy

KW - Homeless

KW - MEMS

KW - Pill count

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035470118&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035470118&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1023/A:1011396711486

DO - 10.1023/A:1011396711486

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0035470118

SN - 1090-7165

VL - 5

SP - 275

EP - 281

JO - AIDS and Behavior

JF - AIDS and Behavior

IS - 3

ER -

Comparing objective measures of adherence to HIV antiretroviral therapy: Electronic medication monitors and unannounced pill counts

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this