ArticlePloS one2021
Monitoring adherence to pharmacological therapy and follow-up examinations among patients with type 2 diabetes in community pharmacies. Results from an experience in Italy.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- ARIA-Italy managing allergic rhinitis and asthma in a changing world: The role of the Pharmacist.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2025Review
- Medication adherence in the elderly population with chronic diseases: a factor analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Estimating Type 2 Diabetes Prevalence: A Model of Drug Consumption Data.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Type 2 Diabetes Patients' Views of Local Pharmacists and Fulfilment with Pharmaceutical Diabetes Care in Syria's Latakia Governorate: An Online Survey Research.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Community pharmacists as vaccinators in the Italian SARS-CoV-2 immunization campaign: implications beyond the pandemic.Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Article
- Triptans utilization in Italian population: A real-life study in community pharmacies.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionType 2 diabetes is an important public health issue, yet adherence to drugs and regular clinical follow-up is still suboptimal. This study aims to evaluate a community pharmacy programme for monitoring and enhancing adherence to prescribed pharmacological therapies and recommended examinations among patients with confirmed diabetes.
methodsThe intervention was conducted in different Italian areas between April 2017 and January 2018. All adult patients who entered a pharmacy with a personal prescription for any antidiabetic drug and agreed to participate, were interviewed. Those found to be non-adherent received counselling from the pharmacists. All patients were invited for a follow-up interview after 3 months.
resultsOverall, 930 patients were enrolled and completed the baseline interview. We found low rates of non-adherence, ranging from 8% to 13% for prescribed pharmacological therapies, and 11-29% for the recommended clinical examinations. Non-adherence to oral therapies was higher among younger and recently diagnosed patients; that to clinical examinations was higher in men, those with an intermediate duration of diabetes and less educated patients. Large geographical differences persisted after the adjustment for individual factors. Only 306 patients (32.9%) returned for the follow-up interview, most of whom were already adherent at baseline.
conclusionsPoor adherence to drugs or clinical examinations is not easy to identify in the usual operating setting of community pharmacies. Furthermore, the majority of patients did not return for follow-up, making it impossible to evaluate the efficacy of the pharmacists' counselling. It might be more effective to plan interventions addressed to specific subgroups of patients or areas.
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.