| Title |
Treatment adherence and disease burden of individuals with rheumatic diseases admitted as outpatients to a large rheumatology center in Shanghai, China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s144624 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Le Zhang, Guo Hong Lu, Shuang Ye, Bin Wu, Yi Shen, Ting Li |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to determine treatment adherence and disease burden, analyze detailed medication problems experienced by patients, and identify factors associated with adherence in patients with rheumatic diseases in China. Patients with confirmed diagnoses of ankylosing spondylitis (AS), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were recruited, regardless of demographics, disease severity, and treatment characteristics. Adherence was assessed using the Compliance Questionnaire for Rheumatology and interview-based self-reports. A backwards-stepwise multivariate regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with adherence. We collected data on 252 patients who had a rheumatic disease and visited our outpatient clinic in January or February of 2017. There were 121 patients with SLE, 70 with RA, and 61 with AS. The overall adherence rate was 41.7%, with 48.7% for SLE patients, 38.6% for RA patients, and 31.1% for AS patients. The overall EuroQol (EQ)-index was 0.761; AS patients had the best EQ-index (0.792), followed by those with SLE (0.780) and RA (0.700). SLE patients also had greater annual direct costs (US$5,103.58) than RA or AS patients. Overall, 41.7% of our rheumatic disease patients were adherent to treatment, lower than in many other parts of the world. This indicates that it is important to identify methods that improve adherence in this population. It is particularly important to improve the health status and reduce the disease burden of patients with SLE, the most common of the three rheumatic diseases we analyzed. Our results suggest that reminder tools may improve adherence. Further prospective research is needed to confirm whether reminder tools and other measures can improve patient compliance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 17 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 36% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 19 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 September 2017.
All research outputs
#14,605,790
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#746
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,471
of 324,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#21
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,453 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.