ArticlePatient preference and adherence2021
Cost-Utility Analysis of a Medication Adherence Management Service Alongside a Cluster Randomized Control Trial in Community Pharmacy.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vitamin D Supplementation and Its Interaction with Common Medications: Impact on Serum Levels and Quality of Life in Adults with Comorbidities.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Development of self-care in Spanish community pharmacies.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2023Article
- Reimbursed medication adherence enhancing interventions in 12 european countries: Current state of the art and future challenges.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is necessary to determine the cost utility of adherence interventions in chronic diseases due to humanistic and economic burden of non-adherence. PURPOSE: To evaluate, alongside a cluster-randomized controlled trial, the cost-utility of a pharmacist-led medication adherence management service (MAMS) compared with usual care in community pharmacies. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe trial was conducted over six months. Patients with treatments for hypertension, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were included. Patients in the intervention group (IG) received a MAMS based on a brief complex intervention, whilst patients in the control group (CG) received usual care. The cost-utility analysis adopted a health system perspective. Costs related to medications, healthcare resources and adherence intervention were included. The effectiveness was estimated as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), using a multiple imputation missing data model. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was calculated on the total sample of patients.
resultsA total of 1186 patients were enrolled (IG: 633; CG: 553). The total intervention cost was estimated to be €27.33 ± 0.43 per patient for six months. There was no statistically significant difference in total cost of medications and healthcare resources per patient between IG and CG. The values of EQ-5D-5L at 6 months were significantly higher in the IG [IG: 0.881 ± 0.005 vs CG: 0.833 ± 0.006; p = 0.000]. In the base case, the service was more expensive and more effective than usual care, resulting in an ICUR of €1,494.82/QALY. In the complete case, the service resulted in an ICUR of €2,086.30/QALY, positioned between the north-east and south-east quadrants of the cost-utility plane. Using a threshold value of €20,000/QALY gained, there is a 99% probability that the intervention is cost-effective.
conclusionThe medication adherence management service resulted in an improvement in the quality of life of the population with chronic disease, with similar costs compared to usual care. The service is cost-effective.
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.