High non-adherence rates to secondary prevention by chemical adherence testing in patients with TIA.

INTRODUCTION: Transient ischaemic attack (TIA) clinics are important for secondary prevention of fatal or disabling stroke. Non-adherence to prescribed medications is an important reason for treatment failure but difficult to diagnose. This study ascertained the utility of a novel biochemical tool in the objective biochemical diagnosis of non-adherence. METHODS: One-hundred consecutive urine samples collected from patients attending the TIA clinic, at a tertiary centre, were analysed for presence or absence of prescribed cardiovascular medications using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Patients were classified as adherent or non-adherent, respectively. Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared between the two cohorts. Univariate regression analyses were performed for individual variables and model fitting was undertaken for significant variables. RESULTS: The mean duration of follow-up from the index event was 31 days [standard deviation (SD): 18.9]. The overall rate of non-adherence for at least one medication was 24%. In univariate analysis, the number of comorbidities [3.4 (SD: 1.9) vs. 2.5 (1.9), P = 0.032] and total number of all prescribed medications [6.0 (3.3) vs 4.4 (2.1), P = 0.032] were higher in the non-adherent group. On multivariate analysis, the total number of medications prescribed correlated with increased non-adherence (odds ratio: 1.27, 95% Confidence Intervals: 1.1-1.5, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: LC-MS/MS is a clinically useful tool for the diagnosis of non-adherence. Nearly a quarter of TIA patients were non-adherent to their cardiovascular medications Addressing non-adherence early may reduce the risk of future disabling cardiovascular events.

Predictors of adverse outcome in the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic: results from a UK centre.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Data concerning differences in demographics/disease severity between the first and second waves of COVID-19 are limited. We aimed to examine prognosis in patients presenting to hospital with COVID-19 amongst different ethnic groups between the first and second waves in the UK. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we included 1763 patients presenting to a regional hospital centre in Leicester (UK) and compared those in the first (n = 956) and second (n = 807) waves. Admission National Early Warning Scores, mechanical ventilation and mortality rate were lower in the second wave compared with the first. RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality risk in second wave patients was approximately half that of first wave patients [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40-0.75]. In the second wave, Black patients were at higher risk of 30-day mortality than White patients (4.73, 1.56-14.3). CONCLUSION: We found that disporportionately higher risks of death in patients from ethnic minority groups were not equivalent across consecutive waves of the pandemic. This suggests that risk factors for death in those from ethnic minority groups are malleable and potentially reversible. Our findings need urgent investigation in larger studies.

Demographic and occupational determinants of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG seropositivity in hospital staff.

BACKGROUND: Although evidence suggests that demographic characteristics including minority ethnicity increase the risk of infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), it is unclear whether these characteristics, together with occupational factors, influence anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG seroprevalence in hospital staff. METHODS: We conducted cross-sectional surveillance examining seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG amongst staff at University Hospitals of Leicester (UHL) NHS Trust. We quantified seroprevalence stratified by ethnicity, occupation and seniority of practitioner and used logistic regression to examine demographic and occupational factors associated with seropositivity. RESULTS: A total of 1148/10662 (10.8%) hospital staff members were seropositive. Compared to White staff (seroprevalence 9.1%), seroprevalence was higher in South Asian (12.3%) and Black (21.2%) staff. The occupations and department with the highest seroprevalence were nurses/healthcare assistants (13.7%) and the Emergency Department (ED)/Acute Medicine (17.5%), respectively. Seroprevalence decreased with seniority in medical/nursing practitioners. Minority ethnicity was associated with seropositivity on an adjusted analysis (South Asian: aOR 1.26; 95%CI: 1.07-1.49 and Black: 2.42; 1.90-3.09). Anaesthetics/ICU staff members were less likely to be seropositive than ED/Acute medicine staff (0.41; 0.27-0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Ethnicity and occupational factors, including specialty and seniority, are associated with seropositivity for anti-SARS-Cov-2 IgG. These findings could be used to inform occupational risk assessments for front-line healthcare workers.

No cases of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare staff in a city under lockdown restrictions: lessons to inform 'Operation Moonshot'.

BACKGROUND: Leicester was the first city in the UK to have 'local lockdown' measures imposed in response to high community rates of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. As part of this response, a directive was issued by NHS England to offer testing of asymptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust (UHL) for SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Between 20 July and 14 August 2020, we invited all HCWs at UHL to attend for SARS-CoV-2 testing by nucleic acid amplification (NAAT). We combined the result of this assay with demographic information from the electronic staff record. RESULTS: A total of 1150 staff (~8% of the workforce) volunteered. The median age was 46 years (IQR 34-55), 972 (84.5%) were female; 234 (20.4%) were of South Asian and 58 (5.0%) of Black ethnicity; 564 (49.0%) were nurses/healthcare assistants. We found no cases of asymptomatic infection. In comparison, average community test positivity rate in Leicester city was 2.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of local lockdowns due to high community transmission rates, voluntary testing of asymptomatic staff has low uptake and low yield and thus its premise and cost-effectiveness should be re-considered.

Nonadherence in Hypertension: How to Develop and Implement Chemical Adherence Testing.

Nonadherence to antihypertensive medication is common, especially in those with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (true treatment-resistant hypertension requires exclusion of nonadherence), and its routine detection is supported by clinical guidelines. Chemical adherence testing is a reliable and valid method to detect adherence, yet methods are unstandardized and are not ubiquitous. This article describes the principles of chemical adherence testing for hypertensive patients and provides a set of recommendations for centers wishing to develop the test. We recommend testing should be done in either of two instances: (1) in those who have resistant hypertension or (2) in those on 2 antihypertensives who have a less than 10 mm Hg drop in systolic blood pressure on addition of the second antihypertensive medication. Furthermore, we recommend that verbal consent is secured before undertaking the test, and the results should be discussed with the patient. Based on medications prescribed in United Kingdom, European Union, and United States, we list top 20 to 24 drugs that cover >95% of hypertension prescriptions which may be included in the testing panel. Information required to identify these medications on mass spectrometry platforms is likewise provided. We discuss issues related to ethics, sample collection, transport, stability, urine versus blood samples, qualitative versus quantitative testing, pharmacokinetics, instrumentation, validation, quality assurance, and gaps in knowledge. We consider how to best present, interpret, and discuss chemical adherence test results with the patient. In summary, this guidance should help clinicians and their laboratories in the development of chemical adherence testing of prescribed antihypertensive drugs.

Measuring adherence to antihypertensive medication using an objective test in older adults attending primary care: cross-sectional study.

Analysis of urine samples using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has previously revealed high rates of non-adherence to antihypertensive medication. It is unclear whether these rates represent those in the general population. This study aimed to investigate whether it is feasible to collect urine samples in a primary care setting and analyse them using LC-MS/MS to detect non-adherence to antihypertensive medication. This study used a prospective, observational cohort design. Consecutive patients were recruited opportunistically from five general practices in UK primary care. They were aged ≥65 years with hypertension and had at least one antihypertensive prescription. Participants were asked to provide a urine sample for analysis of medication adherence. Samples were sent to a laboratory via post and analysed using LC-MS/MS. Predictors of adherence to medication were explored with multivariable logistic regression. Of 349 consecutive patients approached for the study, 214 (61.3%) gave informed consent and 191 (54.7%) provided a valid urine sample for analysis. Participants were aged 76.2 ± 6.6 years and taking a median of 2 antihypertensive medications (IQR 1-3). A total of 27/191 participants (14.2%) reported not taking all of their medications on the day of urine sample collection. However, LC-MS/MS analysis of samples revealed only 4/27 (9/191 in total; 4.7%) were non-adherent to some of their medications. Patients prescribed more antihypertensive medications were less likely to be adherent (OR 0.24, 95%CI 0.09-0.65). Biochemical testing for antihypertensive medication adherence is feasible in routine primary care, although non-adherence to medication is generally low, and therefore widespread testing is not indicated.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine uptake in a multi-ethnic UK healthcare workforce: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) and ethnic minority groups are at increased risk of COVID-19 infection and adverse outcomes. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination is now available for frontline UK HCWs; however, demographic/occupational associations with vaccine uptake in this cohort are unknown. We sought to establish these associations in a large UK hospital workforce. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted cross-sectional surveillance examining vaccine uptake amongst all staff at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust. We examined proportions of vaccinated staff stratified by demographic factors, occupation, and previous COVID-19 test results (serology/PCR) and used logistic regression to identify predictors of vaccination status after adjustment for confounders. We included 19,044 HCWs; 12,278 (64.5%) had received SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Compared to White HCWs (70.9% vaccinated), a significantly smaller proportion of ethnic minority HCWs were vaccinated (South Asian, 58.5%; Black, 36.8%; p < 0.001 for both). After adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, occupation, SARS-CoV-2 serology/PCR results, and COVID-19-related work absences, factors found to be negatively associated with vaccine uptake were younger age, female sex, increased deprivation, pregnancy, and belonging to any non-White ethnic group (Black: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.30, 95% CI 0.26-0.34, p < 0.001; South Asian: aOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.62-0.72, p < 0.001). Those who had previously had confirmed COVID-19 (by PCR) were less likely to be vaccinated than those who had tested negative. Limitations include data being from a single centre, lack of data on staff vaccinated outside the hospital system, and that staff may have taken up vaccination following data extraction. CONCLUSIONS: Ethnic minority HCWs and those from more deprived areas as well as younger staff and female staff are less likely to take up SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. These findings have major implications for the delivery of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programmes, in HCWs and the wider population, and should inform the national vaccination programme to prevent the disparities of the pandemic from widening.

Immunoglobulin isotype compositions of ABO specific antibodies are dependent on the individual patient blood group and blood group specificity: Results from a healthy donor cohort.

Antibodies specific for the blood group ABO system antigens are of clinical significance and immunological interest. Routine clinical methods typically employ direct or indirect haemagglutination methods to measure IgM and IgG, respectively. We have developed a simple, single tube method to quantify IgM, IgG, and IgA specific for A and B antigens in order to improve accuracy and reproducibility, and to investigate the relationships between ABO group antibody type, and antibody level. Plasma samples from 300 healthy blood donors were studied. Levels of IgM and IgG binding to reagent group A and B red cells were measure by agglutination (HA) and multi-colour flow cytometry (MC-FC). IgA was also measured by MC-FC. Our FC method was found to be significantly more reproducible than HA for the measurement of blood group A and B specific antibodies. We found statistically significant correlations between antibodies measured by GC-HA and MC-FC, but sufficient differences to indicate that these methods are not equivalent. By MC-FC, IgM, IgG and IgA levels and isotope profiles were found to be dependent on both the donor ABO type and the specificity of the antibody. This study demonstrated heterogeneity in the immunoglobulin class profiles of ABO-blood group specific antibodies within the healthy population. Differences in isotype profiles of ABO-blood group specific antibodies may indicate fundamental differences in the immune mechanisms that generate these antibodies. This is likely to be relevant to the clinical situations where management or diagnosis depend on ABO-specific antibody detection and measurement.

The feasibility of the PAM intervention to support treatment-adherence in people with hypertension in primary care: a randomised clinical controlled trial.

The PAM intervention is a behavioural intervention to support adherence to anti-hypertensive medications and therefore to lower blood pressure. This feasibility trial recruited 101 nonadherent patients (54% male, mean age 65.8 years) with hypertension and high blood pressure from nine general practices in the UK. The trial had 15.5% uptake and 7.9% attrition rate. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups: the intervention group (n = 61) received the PAM intervention as an adjunct to usual care; the control group (n = 40) received usual care only. At 3 months, biochemically validated medication adherence was improved by 20% (95% CI 3-36%) in the intervention than control, and systolic blood pressure was reduced by 9.16 mmHg (95% CI 5.69-12.64) in intervention than control. Improvements in medication adherence and reductions in blood pressure suggested potential intervention effectiveness. For a subsample of patients, improvements in medication adherence and reductions in full lipid profile (cholesterol 1.39 mmol/mol 95% CI 0.64-1.40) and in glycated haemoglobin (3.08 mmol/mol, 95% CI 0.42-5.73) favoured the intervention. A larger trial will obtain rigorous evidence about the potential clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention.Trial registration Trial date of first registration 28/01/2019. ISRCTN74504989. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN74504989 .

Biochemical Urine Testing of Medication Adherence and Its Association With Clinical Markers in an Outpatient Population of Type 2 Diabetes Patients: Analysis in the DIAbetes and LifEstyle Cohort Twente (DIALECT).

OBJECTIVE: To assess adherence to the three main drug classes in real-world patients with type 2 diabetes using biochemical urine testing, and to determine the association of nonadherence with baseline demographics, treatment targets, and complications. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Analyses were performed of baseline data on 457 patients in the DIAbetes and LifEstyle Cohort Twente (DIALECT) study. Adherence to oral antidiabetics (OADs), antihypertensives, and statins was determined by analyzing baseline urine samples using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Primary outcomes were microvascular and macrovascular complications and treatment targets of LDL cholesterol, HbA1c, and blood pressure. These were assessed cross-sectionally at baseline. RESULTS: Overall, 89.3% of patients were identified as adherent. Adherence rates to OADs, antihypertensives, and statins were 95.7%, 92.0%, and 95.5%, respectively. The prevalence of microvascular (81.6% vs. 66.2%; P = 0.029) and macrovascular complications (55.1% vs. 37.0%; P = 0.014) was significantly higher in nonadherent patients. The percentage of patients who reached an LDL cholesterol target of ≤2.5 mmol/L was lower (67.4% vs. 81.1%; P = 0.029) in nonadherent patients. Binary logistic regression indicated that higher BMI, current smoking, elevated serum LDL cholesterol, high HbA1c, presence of diabetic kidney disease, and presence of macrovascular disease were associated with nonadherence. CONCLUSIONS: Although medication adherence of real-world type 2 diabetes patients managed in specialist care was relatively high, the prevalence of microvascular and macrovascular complications was significantly higher in nonadherent patients, and treatment targets were reached less frequently. This emphasizes the importance of objective detection and tailored interventions to improve adherence.

Non-adherence to heart failure medications predicts clinical outcomes: assessment in a single spot urine sample by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (results of a prospective multicentre study).

AIMS: Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is an objective new technique to assess non-adherence to medications. We used this method to study the prevalence, predictors and outcomes of non-adherence in patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: This study included 1296 patients with HFrEF from BIOSTAT-CHF, a study that aimed to optimise guideline-recommended therapies. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, ß-blockers and loop diuretics were measured in a single spot urine sample at 9 months using LC-MS/MS. The relationship between medication non-adherence and the composite endpoint of all-cause death or heart failure hospitalisation, over a median follow-up of 21 months, was evaluated. Non-adherence to at least one prescribed medication was observed in 45.9% of patients. The strongest predictor of non-adherence was non-adherence to any of the other medication classes (P < 0.0005). Regional differences within Europe were observed. On multivariable analyses, non-adherence to ACEi/ARBs and ß-blockers was associated with an increased risk of the composite endpoint [hazard ratio (HR) 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-1.95, P = 0.008 and HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.12-1.96, P = 0.006, respectively). Non-adherence to ß-blockers was also associated with an increased risk of death (HR 2.48, 95% CI 1.67-3.68, P < 0.0005). Patients who were non-adherent to loop diuretics were healthier and had a decreased risk of the composite endpoint (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51-0.93, P = 0.014). Non-adherence to mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists was not related to any clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: Non-adherence to medications, assessed by a single urine test, is common and predicts clinical outcomes in patients with HFrEF.

Achieving optimal adherence to medical therapy by telehealth: Findings from the ORBITA medication adherence sub-study.

INTRODUCTION: The ORBITA trial of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus a placebo procedure for patients with stable angina was conducted across six sites in the United Kingdom via home monitoring and telephone consultations. Patients underwent detailed assessment of medication adherence which allowed us to measure the efficacy of the implementation of the optimization protocol and interpretation of the main trial endpoints. METHODS: Prescribing data were collected throughout the trial. Self-reported adherence was assessed, and urine samples collected at pre-randomization and at follow-up for direct assessment of adherence using high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC MS/MS). RESULTS: Self-reported adherence was >96% for all drugs in both treatment groups at both stages. The percentage of samples in which drug was detected at pre-randomization and at follow-up in the PCI versus placebo groups respectively was: clopidogrel, 96% versus 90% and 98% versus 94%; atorvastatin, 95% versus 92% and 92% versus 91%; perindopril, 95% versus 97% and 85% versus 100%; bisoprolol, 98% versus 99% and 96% versus 97%; amlodipine, 99% versus 99% and 94% versus 96%; nicorandil, 98% versus 96% and 94% versus 92%; ivabradine, 100% versus 100% and 100% versus 100%; and ranolazine, 100% versus 100% and 100% versus 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence levels were high throughout the study when quantified by self-reporting methods and similarly high proportions of drug were detected by urinary assay. The results indicate successful implementation of the optimization protocol delivered by telephone, an approach that could serve as a model for treatment of chronic conditions, particularly as consultations are increasingly conducted online.

Reducing vitamin D requests in a primary care cohort: a quality improvement study.

BACKGROUND: Since 2000, vitamin D requests have increased 2-6 fold with no evidence of a corresponding improvement in the health of the population. The ease of vitamin D requesting may contribue to the rapid rise in its demand and, hence, pragmatic interventions to reduce vitamin D test ordering are warranted. AIM: To study the effect on vitamin D requests following a redesign of the electronic forms used in primary care. In addition, any potential harms were studied and the potential cost-savings associated with the intervention were evaluated. DESIGN & SETTING: An interventional study took place within primary care across Leicestershire, England. METHOD: The intervention was a redesign of the electronic laboratory request form for primary care practitioners across the county. Data were collected on vitamin D requests for a 6-month period prior to the change (October 2016 to March 2017) and the corresponding 6-month period post-intervention (October 2017 to March 2018), data were also collected on vitamin D, calcium, and phosphate levels. RESULTS: The number of requests for vitamin D decreased by 14 918 (36.2%) following the intervention. Changes in the median calcium and phosphate were not clinically significant. Cost-modelling suggested that if such an intervention was implemented across primary care in the UK, there would be a potential annual saving to the NHS of £38 712 606. CONCLUSION: A simple pragmatic redesign of the electronic request form for vitamin D test led to a significant reduction in vitamin D requests without any adverse effect on the quality of care.

Effectiveness of the Ready to Reduce Risk (3R) complex intervention for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is responsible for 31% of all global deaths. Primary prevention strategies are needed to improve longer-term adherence to statins and healthy lifestyle behaviours to reduce risk in people at risk of cardiovascular disease. METHODS: Pragmatic randomised controlled trial recruited between May 2016 and March 2017 from primary care practices, England. Participants (n = 212) prescribed statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with total cholesterol level ≥ 5 mmol/l were randomised: 105 to the intervention group and 107 to the control group, stratified by age and sex. The 3R intervention involved two facilitated, structured group education sessions focusing on medication adherence to statins, lifestyle behaviours and cardiovascular risk, with 44 weeks of medication reminders and motivational text messages and two supportive, coaching phone calls (at approximately 2 weeks and 6 months). The control group continued with usual clinical care. Both groups received a basic information leaflet. The primary outcome was medication adherence to statins objectively measured by a biochemical urine test. Self-reported adherence and practice prescription data provided additional measures. Secondary outcomes included cholesterol profile, blood pressure, anthropometric data, cardiovascular risk score, and self-reported lifestyle behaviours and psychological measures (health/medication beliefs, quality of life, health status). All outcomes were assessed at 12 months. RESULTS: Baseline adherence to statins was 47% (control) and 62% (intervention). No significant difference between the groups found for medication adherence to statins using either the urine test (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.34 to 3.06, P = 0.968) or other measures. This may have been due to the higher than expected adherence levels at baseline. The adjusted mean difference between the groups (in favour of the intervention group) for diastolic blood pressure (- 4.28 mmHg (95% CI - 0.98 to - 1.58, P = 0.002)) and waist circumference (- 2.55 cm (95% CI - 4.55 to - 0.55, P = 0.012)). The intervention group also showed greater perceived control of treatment and more coherent understanding of the condition. CONCLUSIONS: The 3R programme successfully led to longer-term improvements in important clinical lifestyle indicators but no improvement in medication adherence, raising questions about the suitability of such a broad, multiple risk factor approach for improving medication adherence for primary prevention of CVD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN16863160), March 11, 2006.

Effect of pragmatic versus explanatory interventions on medication adherence in people with cardiometabolic conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesise findings from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions aimed at increasing medication adherence in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and/or cardiovascular disease (CVD). And, in a novel approach, to compare the intervention effect of studies which were categorised as being more pragmatic or more explanatory using the Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 (PRECIS-2) tool, to identify whether study design affects outcomes. As explanatory trials are typically held under controlled conditions, findings from such trials may not be relatable to real-world clinical practice. In comparison, pragmatic trials are designed to replicate real-world conditions and therefore findings are more likely to represent those found if the intervention were to be implemented in routine care. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Web of Science and CINAHL from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: RCTs lasting ≥3 months (90 days), involving ≥200 patients in the analysis, with either established CVD and/or T2DM and which measured medication adherence. From 4403 citations, 103 proceeded to full text review. Studies published in any language other than English and conference abstracts were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Change in medication adherence. RESULTS: Of 4403 records identified, 34 studies were considered eligible, of which 28, including 30 861 participants, contained comparable outcome data for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Overall interventions were associated with an increase in medication adherence (OR 1.57 (95% CI: 1.33 to 1.84), p<0.001; standardised mean difference 0.24 (95% CI: -0.10 to 0.59) p=0.101). The effectiveness of interventions did not differ significantly between studies considered pragmatic versus explanatory (p=0.598), but did differ by intervention type, with studies that included a multifaceted rather than a single-faceted intervention having a more significant effect (p=0.010). The analysis used random effect models and used the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool to assess study quality. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, interventions were associated with a significant increase in medication adherence. Overall multifaceted interventions which included an element of education alongside regular patient contact or follow-up showed the most promise. Effectiveness of interventions between pragmatic and explanatory trials was comparable, suggesting that findings can be transferred from idealised to real-word conditions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017059460.

Antihypertensive Medication Adherence and Confirmation of True Refractory Hypertension.

Refractory hypertension (RfHTN) is a phenotype of antihypertensive treatment failure defined as uncontrolled BP despite the use of effective doses of ≥5 antihypertensive medications including a long-acting thiazide-like diuretic (chlorthalidone) and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. The degree of medication nonadherence is unknown among patients with RfHTN. In this prospective evaluation, 54 patients with apparent RfHTN were recruited from the University of Alabama at Birmingham Hypertension Clinic after having uncontrolled BP at 3 or more clinic visits. All patients' BP was evaluated by automated office BP and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (n=49). Antihypertensive medication adherence was determined by measuring 24-hour urine specimens for antihypertensive medications and their metabolites by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (n=45). Of the 45 patients who completed 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring, 40 (88.9%) had confirmed RfHTN based on an elevated automated office BP (≥130/80 mm Hg), mean 24-hour ABP (≥125/75 mm Hg), and mean awake (day-time) ABP (≥130/80 mm Hg). Out of the 40 fully evaluated patients with RfHTN, 16 (40.0%) were fully adherent with all prescribed medications. Eighteen (45.0%) patients were partially adherent and 6 (15.0%) had none of the prescribed agents detected in their urine. Of 18 patients who were partially adherent, 5 (12.5%) were adherent with at least 5 medications, including chlorthalidone and the mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, consistent with true RfHTN. Of patients identified as having apparent RfHTN, 52.5% were adherent with at least 5 antihypertensive medications, including chlorthalidone and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, confirming true RfTHN. These findings validate RfHTN as a rare, but true phenotype of antihypertensive treatment failure.

Masked Uncontrolled Hypertension Is Not Attributable to Medication Nonadherence.

Masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) in treated hypertensive patients is defined as controlled automated office blood pressure (BP; <135/85 mm Hg) in-clinic but uncontrolled out-of-clinic BP by ambulatory BP monitoring (awake [daytime] readings ≥135/85 mm Hg or 24-hour readings ≥130/80 mm Hg). To determine whether MUCH is attributable to antihypertensive medication nonadherence. One hundred eighty-four enrolled patients were confirmed to have controlled office BP; of these, 167 patients were with adequate 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings. Of 167 patients, 86 were controlled by in-clinic BP assessment but had uncontrolled ambulatory awake BP, indicative of MUCH. The remaining 81 had controlled in-clinic and ambulatory awake BP, consistent with true controlled hypertension. After exclusion of 9 patients with missing 24-hour urine collections, antihypertensive medication adherence was determined based on the detection of urinary drugs or drug metabolites by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Of the 81 patients with MUCH, 69 (85.2%) were fully adherent and 12 (14.8%) were partially adherent (fewer medications detected than prescribed). Of the 77 patients with true controlled hypertension, 69 (89.6%) were fully adherent with prescribed antihypertensive medications and 8 (10.4%) were partially adherent. None of the patients in either group were fully nonadherent. There was no statistically significant difference in complete or partial adherence between the MUCH and true controlled groups (P=0.403). Measurement of urinary drug and drug metabolite levels demonstrates a similarly high level of antihypertensive medication adherence in both MUCH and truly controlled hypertensive patients. These findings indicate that MUCH is not attributable to antihypertensive medication nonadherence.

Corrigendum and Editorial Warning Regarding Use of the MMAS Scale (The Ready to Reduce Risk (3R) Study for a Group Educational Intervention With Telephone and Text Messaging Support to Improve Medication Adherence for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial).

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/11289.].