ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
Intake Patterns and Experiences of Patients Using Direct Oral Anticoagulants Measured by Electronic Monitoring in Community Pharmacies.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Several international organizations advocate for monitoring of adherence to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), given the prevalent issue of suboptimal adherence to DOACs. The aim was to investigate intake patterns in patients on DOAC therapy by electronic monitoring of medication adherence in community pharmacies (using a Medication Event Monitoring System Patients and Methods: Patients using apixaban, rivaroxaban or edoxaban and visiting a community pharmacy, were included. Adherence was electronically monitored over a twelve-week period. Pharmacists conducted data readings from the electronic device at six and twelve weeks, and discussed these data with the patients. At the beginning and end of the study, patients completed a questionnaire about their expectations and experiences respectively. Results: Eighty-nine patients were included and high taking adherence rates were observed (median adherence of 100% for once-daily dosed patients and 96.7% for twice-daily dosed patients), but more than half of the patients took at least one dose too late or skipped at least one dose, possibly resulting in temporarily reduced protection against thromboembolic events. Most patients who felt that their adherence had improved, believed this was due to the combination of the electronic device and the personal follow-up by the pharmacist. Although most patients stated that medication adherence is their own responsibility, they were grateful for the support they received from their community pharmacist. Conclusion: High adherence rates were observed, but there was still room for improvement regarding intake moments. Positive experiences with an electronic device for medication adherence monitoring were reported.
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.