Measures of adherence based on self-report exhibited poor agreement with those based on pharmacy records

  • Line Guénette
    Faculté de pharmacie, Université Laval, Québec, Canada, and Unité de recherche en santé des populations, Hôpital Saint-Sacrement du CHA, 1050, chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8 Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • Jocelyne Moisan
    Corresponding author. Tel.: 418 682 7511 ext 4654; fax: 418 682 7962.
    Faculté de pharmacie, Université Laval, Québec, Canada, and Unité de recherche en santé des populations, Hôpital Saint-Sacrement du CHA, 1050, chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec, QC G1S 4L8 Canada
    Search for articles by this author
  • Michel Préville
    Centre de recherche sur le vieillissement, Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Sherbrooke, 1036, rue Belvédère Sud, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada J1H 4C4
    Search for articles by this author
  • Richard Boyer
    Centre de recherche Fernand-Seguin, Hopital Louis-Hypolite Lafontaine, 7331, rue Hochelaga, Montréal, Québec, Canada H1N 3V2
    Search for articles by this author



      To assess the level of agreement between a self-reported measure of adherence with prescribed drug and a measure of adherence based on pharmacy data.


      During an in-home interview, people aged 65+ were asked to report all prescription drugs they had taken in the preceding month. For each drug, a four-item questionnaire was used to determine self-reported adherence. In the pharmacy records, each drug that had been filled at least four times was analyzed, and the percentage of days with the drug available was calculated. Two types of adherence were studied: (1) adherence by individual, and (2) adherence by drug. The level of agreement was assessed using kappa (κ) statistics and proportions of agreement.


      We compared the adherence measures among 189 individuals (880 drugs). Among all, 90 individuals (48%) self-reported adherence, whereas 95 individuals (50%) were adherent according to the records. The level of agreement between these two measures was slight (κ = 0.16 [95% CI: 0.02–0.30]). Individuals self-reported to be adherent for 81% of the drugs, while pharmacy records showed adherence for 83% of them (κ = 0.13 [95% CI: 0.05–0.20]).


      Self-reported measures of adherence exhibited poor agreement with those based on pharmacy records.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment


        • Conrad K.J.
        • Budiman-Mak E.
        • Lucas I.R.
        • Gallagher C.M.
        • Weiss L.
        Developping a comprehensive approach to improve medication adherence in the elderly.
        J Compliance Health Care. 1989; 4: 39-55
        • Salzman C.
        Medication compliance in the elderly.
        J Clin Psychiatry. 1995; 56: 18-22
        • Sclar D.A.
        Improving medication compliance: a review of selected issues.
        Clin Ther. 1991; 13: 436-440
        • Haynes R.B.
        • Taylor D.W.
        • Sacket D.L.
        Compliance in health care.
        Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore1979
        • Steiner J.F.
        • Prochazka A.V.
        The assessment of refill compliance using pharmacy records: methods, validity, and applications.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1997; 50: 105-116
        • Farmer K.C.
        Methods for measuring and monitoring medication regimen adherence in clinical trials and clinical practice.
        Clin Ther. 1999; 21: 1074-1090
        • Grégoire J.-P.
        • Guibert R.
        • Archambault A.
        • Contandriopoulos A.-P.
        Medication compliance in a family practice.
        Can Fam Physician. 1992; 38: 2333-2337
        • Svarstad B.L.
        • Chewning B.A.
        • Sleath B.L.
        • Claesson C.
        The brief medication questionnaire: a tool for screening patient adherence and barriers to adherence.
        Patient Educ Couns. 1999; 37: 113-124
        • Grymonpre R.E.
        • Didur C.D.
        • Montgomery P.R.
        • Sitar D.S.
        Pill count, self-report, and pharmacy claims data to measure medication adherence in the elderly.
        Ann Pharmacother. 1998; 32: 749-754
        • Morisky D.E.
        • Green L.W.
        • Levine D.M.
        Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence.
        Med Care. 1986; 24: 67-74
        • Stewart M.
        The validity of an interview to assess a patient's drug taking.
        Am J Prev Med. 1987; 3: 95-100
        • Norell S.E.
        Methods in assessing drug compliance.
        Acta Med Scand. 1983; 683: 35-40
        • Tamblyn R.
        • Lavoie G.
        • Petrella L.
        • Monette J.
        The use of prescription claims databases in pharmacoepidemiological research: the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the prescription claims database in Québec.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1995; 48: 999-1009
        • Steiner J.F.
        • Koepsell T.D.
        • Fihn S.D.
        • Inui T.S.
        A general method of compliance assessment using centralized pharmacy records. Description and validation.
        Med Care. 1988; 26: 814-823
        • Choo P.W.
        • Rand C.S.
        • Inui T.S.
        • Lee M.L.
        • Cain E.
        • Cordeiro-Breault M.
        • et al.
        Validation of patient reports, automated pharmacy records, and pill counts with electronic monitoring of adherence to antihypertensive therapy.
        Med Care. 1999; 37: 846-857
        • Hamilton R.A.
        • Briceland L.L.
        Use of prescription-refill records to assess patient compliance.
        Am J Hosp Pharm. 1992; 49: 1691-1696
        • Grégoire J.-P.
        • Guibert R.
        • Archambault A.
        • Contandriopoulos A.-P.
        Measurement of non-compliance to antihypertensive medication using pill counts and pharmacy records.
        J Soc Adm Pharm. 1997; 14: 198-207
        • Sjahid S.I.
        • van der Linden P.D.
        • Stricker B.H.C.
        Agreement between the pharmacy medication history and patient interview for cardiovascular drugs: the Rotterdam elderly study.
        Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1998; 45: 591-595
        • Landry J.A.
        • Smyer M.A.
        • Tubman J.G.
        • Lago D.J.
        • Roberts J.
        • Simonson W.
        Validation of two methods of data collection of self-reported medicine use among the elderly.
        Gerontologist. 1988; 28: 672-676
        • Katzman R.
        • Brown T.
        • Fuld P.
        • Peck A.
        • Schechter R.
        • Schimmel H.
        Validation of a short Orientation-Memory-Concentration Test of cognitive impairment.
        Am J Psychiatry. 1983; 140: 734-739
        • Fillenbaum G.
        • Heyman A.
        • Williams K.
        • Burchett B.
        Sensitivity and specificity of standardized screens of cognitive impairment and dementia among elderly black and white community residents.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1990; 43: 651-660
        • Darvous P.
        • Lamour Y.
        • Debrand E.
        • Rondot P.
        A comparative evaluation of the short orientation memory concentration test of cognitive impairment.
        J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1987; 50: 1312-1317
        • Daveluy C.
        • Pica L.
        • Audet N.
        • Courtemanche R.
        • et al.
        Enquête générale sur la santé et le bien-être de la population 1998.
        Institut de la statistique du Québec, Québec2000
        • Erickson S.R.
        • Coombs J.H.
        • Kirking D.M.
        • Azimi A.R.
        Compliance from self-reported versus pharmacy claims data with metered-dose inhalers.
        Ann Pharmacother. 2001; 35: 997-1003
        • Christensen D.B.
        • Williams B.
        • Goldberg H.I.
        • Martin D.P.
        • Engelberg R.
        • LoGerfo J.P.
        Assessing compliance to antihypertensive medications using computer-based pharmacy records.
        Med Care. 1997; 35: 1164-1170
      1. WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) Classification Index. Oslo; 2000.

        • Landis J.R.
        • Koch G.G.
        The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.
        Biometrics. 1977; 33: 159-174
        • Feinstein A.R.
        • Cicchetti D.V.
        High agreement but low kappa: I. the problems of two paradoxes.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1990; 43: 543-549
        • Fleiss J.L.
        Statistical methods for rates and proportions.
        2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York1981
        • Cicchetti D.V.
        • Feinstein A.R.
        High agreement but low kappa: II. Resolving the paradoxes.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1990; 43: 551-558
        • Belsley D.
        • Kuh E.
        • Welsch R.
        Regression diagnostics: identifying influential data and sources of collinearity.
        Wiley, New York1980
      2. SAS Institute Inc. SAS OnlineDoc, Version 8. 1999.

        • Venturini F.
        • Nichol M.B.
        • Sung J.C.
        • Bailey K.L.
        • Cody M.
        • McCombs J.S.
        Compliance with sulfonylureas in a health maintenance organization: a pharmacy record-based study.
        Ann Pharmacother. 1999; 33: 281-288
        • Farris K.B.
        • Kaplan B.
        • Kirking D.M.
        Examination of days supply in computerized prescription claims.
        J Pharmacoepidemiol. 1994; 3: 63-76
        • Paes A.H.
        • Bakker A.
        • Soe-Agnie C.J.
        Measurement of patient compliance.
        Pharm World Sci. 1998; 20: 73-77