Recall accuracy for prescription medications: self-report compared with database information.

Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 27599, USA.
American Journal of Epidemiology (Impact Factor: 4.98). 12/1995; 142(10):1103-12.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A methodological study was performed in 1992 to evaluate the accuracy of self-reported use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and noncontraceptive estrogens that had been dispensed during the previous 12 years. A sample of 560 individuals dispensed NSAIDs or estrogens, and 140 individuals without NSAID/estrogen dispensations were selected from the Group Health Cooperative pharmacy database. Demographic, behavioral, and drug information was ascertained by telephone interview for 356 persons with and 98 persons without NSAID/estrogen dispensations. Of those with only a single NSAID dispensation, 41% (95% confidence interval (CI) 32-50%) were able to recall any NSAID use compared with 85% (95% CI 76-94%) for those with multiple NSAID dispensations. Thirty percent (95% CI 24-36%) recalled the NSAID name, and 15% (95% CI 10-20%) recalled both the name and dose. For estrogens, 78% (95% CI 70-86%) recalled the name, but only 26% (95% CI 17-34%) recalled the name and dose. Age, but not sex, appeared to influence recall accuracy: Persons 50-65 years of age recalled the NSAID name more accurately than those aged 66-80 (odds ratio (OR) = 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-3.4). A similar advantage was noted for 50- to 65-year-old women in recalling the estrogen name (OR = 1.5, 95% CI 0.6-3.9). Drug name was recalled more frequently for exposures stopped 2-3 years prior to interview than for those stopped 7-11 years prior (OR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.6-5.7, and OR = 2.4, 95% CI 0.9-6.7, for NSAIDs and estrogens, respectively). Specificity was consistently high, ranging from 92% to 100%. This study suggests significant underascertainment of self-reported prescription drug exposure but little evidence that exposures are overreported.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Epidemiological study findings regarding the association between use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) have been inconsistent. We aimed to systematically review epidemiological studies of the association and calculate pooled relative risks using meta-analytic methods. We searched eight electronic literature databases and three clinical trial registers to identify all studies (including observational studies and randomized clinical trials) of the association published prior to October 2013. Identified studies were independently reviewed by two researchers. We used a random effects model to calculate pooled odds ratio (PORs). Heterogeneity amongst studies was examined using Cochran's Q and I-squared (I2) tests; and sources of heterogeneity were explored using subgroup and meta-regression analyses. A total of 17 studies (12 case-control studies and five cohort studies), all adult studies, were included. Use of NSAIDs was not associated with overall risk of NHL [POR = 1.05, and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.90–1.22] or NHL subtypes including B-cell lymphoma, T-cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL). Aspirin use was associated with reduced risk of CLL/SLL (POR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.54–0.91) but not with the risk of all NHLs (POR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.89–1.17). Use of non-aspirin NSAIDs was associated with increased risk of NHL (POR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.01–1.97) amongst females only. The epidemiologic evidence remains inconclusive. Effects of NSAIDs may differ by drug type, NHL subtype, and sex and more studies taking into consideration these differences are needed. © 2014 The Authors. Hematological Oncology Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Hematological Oncology 09/2014; DOI:10.1002/hon.2165 · 2.36 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Clinical trials have shown that evidence-based secondary prevention medications reduce mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Yet, these medications are generally underused in daily practice, and older people are often excluded from drug trials. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the relationship between adherence to evidence-based drugs and post-AMI mortality varies with increasing age. The study population was defined as all residents in the Local Health Authority of Bologna (Italy) hospitalized for AMI between January 1, 2008 and June 30, 2011, and followed up until December 31, 2012. Medication adherence was calculated as the proportion of days covered (PDC) for filled prescriptions of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, antiplatelet drugs, and statins; patients were classified as adherent (PDC ≥75 %) or nonadherent (PDC <75 %). We used incidence density sampling, and the moderating effect of age on the relationship between adherence and mortality was investigated through conditional multiple logistic regression analysis. The study population comprised 3963 patients. During the 5-year study period, 1085 deaths (27.4 %) were observed. For both younger and older patients, adherence to polytherapy (three or four medications) was associated with lower mortality (adj. rate ratio = 0.41; P < 0.001). A significant inverse relationship was found between adherence to each of the four medications and mortality, although the risk reduction associated with antiplatelet therapy declined after the age of 70-75. The beneficial effect of evidence-based polytherapy on mortality following AMI is observed also in older populations. Nevertheless, the risk-benefit ratio associated with antiplatelet therapy is less favorable with increasing age.
    European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 12/2014; 71(2). DOI:10.1007/s00228-014-1793-8 · 2.70 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The study aims were to investigate secular trends in antiepileptic drug (AED) use in women during pregnancy, and to compare the use of first- and second-generation AEDs. Study participants consisted of female Florida Medicaid beneficiaries, older than 15 years, and pregnant within the time period 1999 to 2009. Fifteen AEDs were categorized into first and second generation of AEDs. Continuous use of AEDs was defined as at least 2 consecutive AED prescriptions totaling more than a 30-day supply. Polytherapy was defined as 2 or more AEDs continuously used for at least 30 overlapping days. Annual prevalence was estimated and compared. We included 2,099 pregnant women who were enrolled in Florida Medicaid from 1999 to 2009 and exposed to AEDs during pregnancy. Although there were fluctuations, overall AED use in the study cohort did not increase from 2000 to 2009 (β ± standard error [SE]: -0.07 ± 0.06, p = 0.31). The use of first-generation AEDs decreased (β ± SE: -6.21 ± 0.47, p < 0.0001), whereas the use of second-generation AEDs increased (β ± SE: 6.27 ± 0.52, p < 0.0001) from 2000 to 2009. AED use in polytherapy did not change through the study period. Valproate use reduced from 23% to 8% in the study population (β ± SE: -1.61 ± 0.36, p = 0.0019), but this decrease was only for women receiving an AED for epilepsy and was not present for other indications. The second-generation AEDs are replacing first-generation AEDs in both monotherapy and polytherapy. Valproate use has declined for epilepsy but not other indications. Additional changes in AED use are expected in future years. © 2015 American Academy of Neurology.
    Neurology 02/2015; DOI:10.1212/WNL.0000000000001304 · 8.30 Impact Factor