↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Adherence to alendronic or risedronic acid treatment, combined or not to calcium and vitamin D, and related determinants in Italian patients with osteoporosis

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Adherence to alendronic or risedronic acid treatment, combined or not to calcium and vitamin D, and related determinants in Italian patients with osteoporosis
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, April 2016
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s95634
Pubmed ID
Authors

Silvia Calabria, Elisa Cinconze, Maurizio Rossini, Elisa Rossi, Aldo Pietro Maggioni, Antonella Pedrini, Marisa De Rosa

Abstract

Osteoporosis is a chronic disease and an important health and social burden due to its worldwide prevalence. Literature and clinical experience report incomplete adherence to the therapy. This retrospective observational study aimed at assessing the adherence to first-line antiosteoporosis drugs (AODs; reimbursed by the National Health System, according to the Italian Medicine Agency recommendation number 79), alendronate or risedronate, with or without calcium and/or vitamin D supplements, in a real, Italian clinical setting. Analyses were carried out on data present in the ARNO Observatory, a population-based patient-centric Italian database. From a population of 5,808,832 inhabitants with available data, a cohort of 3.3 million of patients aged ≥40 years was selected. New users of first-line AODs as monotherapy (accrual period, 2007-2009) were followed up over 3 years to assess adherence at 6, 12, and 36 months to AODs and to supplements and related determinants. Approximately 40,000 new users were identified: mostly women, aged on average (standard deviation) 71±10 years. Alendronate was the most prescribed (38.2% of patients), followed by risedronate (34.9%) and alendronate with colecalciferol as a fixed-dose combination (25.8%). Adherence at the 6-month follow-up was 54%, and this constantly and significantly decreased after 1 year to 46%, and after 3 years to 33% (P<0.01). Adherence to the fixed-dose combination was higher than to plain alendronate throughout the follow-up period. Similarly, adherence to supplements constantly decreased with the duration of treatment. Women and patients aged >50 years were more likely to adhere to treatment regimen (P<0.001). The use of drugs for peptic ulcer and gastroesophageal reflux disease and of corticosteroids for systemic use were significantly associated with high adherence at different times. Polytherapy (>5 drugs), cardiovascular, and neurological therapies were significantly associated with low adherence throughout the follow-up period. In a huge clinical practice sample, this study highlights suboptimal adherence to first-line AODs and to supplements and important determinants, such as concomitant therapies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 27%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Lecturer 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Professor 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 73%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Unknown 2 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 18 February 2017.
All research outputs
#932,963
of 9,077,263 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#56
of 867 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,166
of 275,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#4
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,077,263 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 867 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 275,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.