ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2016
Achieving Adherence After First-Line Antihypertensive Treatment: Should Fixed-Dose Combinations Receive Priority?
Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does the Polypill Improve Patient Adherence Compared to Its Individual Formulations? A Systematic Review.Pharmaceutics · 2020Review
- Fixed-dose combinations: A valuable tool to improve adherence to antihypertensive treatment.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2018Article
- Health Care Costs Associated with Addition, Titration, and Switching Antihypertensive Medications After First-Line Treatment: Results from a Commercially Insured Sample.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data on the long-term outcomes of the use of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) or free-pill combinations (FPCs), titration of doses, and switching are currently unavailable for identifying a preferred strategy for adherence. In the lack of these evidences, adherence can be a useful guiding criteria. The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study using the BlueCross BlueShield of Texas (2008-2012) database to compare adherence among 5998 patients who received treatment modifications (TMs). Results of the propensity score-adjusted model indicate that FDC and uptitration strategies have higher odds of adherence compared with the switch strategy (P<.05). Among patients with a history of poor adherence, the odds of adherence were up to 26% higher for the FDC strategy compared with alternative strategies (P<.05). Factors including age, number of comedications, first-line drug class, and health services utilization are associated with adherence. In conclusion, FDCs should be prioritized for TM, particularly if the patient has a history of poor adherence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.