Extent of non-adherence and non-persistence in asthma patients: analysis of a large claims data set.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess non-adherence (NA) and non-persistence (NP) to long-acting asthma medications in Germany by differentiating between measurement of NA in periods of therapy continuation and measurement of NP in therapy-naïve patients. METHODS: We analyzed treatment adherence to long-acting asthma medication using German claims data for periods of treatment continuation based on the medication possession ratio (MPR) and the proportion of days covered. Persistence was assessed in treatment-naïve patients. Outcomes were observed from the date of the first to the last prescription within a 12-month period. Both NA and NP analyses considered prescription supply, using either defined daily dosages, or prescribed daily dosages derived from a medical chart review. RESULTS: We identified 52,508 asthma patients (mean age: 40.1, 58.4% female) who received at least two long-acting asthma prescriptions within 12 months; 50,660 treatment-naïve patients were included in the NP analysis (mean age: 39.7, 58.8% female). The mean 12-month MPR was 38.5% (89.4% NA according to MPR ≤ 80%) and the average proportion of days covered was 40.4% (85.9% NA). Agent-specific MPR and NA rates varied between 31.8% (91.8% NA) and 56.2% (71.6% NA). The average weighted-MPR increased to 53.1% when using the prescribed daily dosage. Based on a > 90-day gap definition, 86.7% of patients were considered non-persistent after 12 months (>180: 72.3%). When using prescribed daily dosages, NP rates ranged from 66.7 to 78.5%. CONCLUSION: High levels of treatment NA and NP indicate a substantial need to improve adherence and persistence to long-acting asthma medication in Germany.

Identifying the Causes Increasing the Risk of Non-Adherence in Adult Patients with Asthma: An Analysis Combining Patient Survey Data with German Claims Data.

BACKGROUND: There exists a range of treatments in the management of asthma. Non-adherence to these medications has been identified as a factor negatively impacting the effects of treatment. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify the potential barriers to medication adherence among adult patients with asthma in Germany. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multi-center observational study was conducted addressing adult patients with asthma who were prescribed regular maintenance medication between 2014 and 2016. Data were derived from physicians' documentation as well as claims data, which were linked to the above primary observational data, and patient survey data. Adherence barriers were assessed by the validated Adherence Barriers Questionnaire, both descriptively and in a logistic regression framework. Cluster analysis identified distinct patient groups with respect to the relevance of specific adherence barriers. RESULTS: We included 524 patients with asthma (mean age 53.1 years, 74.6% female, 43.1% allergic asthma, 37.6% nonallergic, 19.3% mixed). Most of the participants reported to face at least three barriers (61.1%). Frequently reported barriers were the perception that medications are all harmful (53.6% of the participants), the burden of medication co-payment (44.1%), positive perception about current health status (39.9%), feeling of depression (30.9%), and the fear of side effects (27.5%). Four distinct patient clusters could be identified: cluster 1 with a low number of barriers (28.6% of participants), cluster 2 (11.6%) with a comparably high number of existing barriers, cluster 3 with high importance of depression as a barrier (27.3% of participants), and cluster 4 that was dominated by the perception that medications are all harmful (32.5% of participants). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study provide important insights for further development of adherence programs, which should focus on distinct patients' clusters that differ substantially in the relevance of specific adherence barriers.