Non-compliance: the Achilles' heel of anti-fracture efficacy.

About 50% of patients fail to comply or persist with anti-osteoporosis treatment regimens within 1 year. Poor compliance is associated with higher fracture rates. Causes of poor compliance are unknown. As it is not possible to predict poor compliance, close monitoring of compliance is needed. Despit...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Seeman, E, Compston, J, Adachi, J, Brandi, M, Cooper, C, Dawson-Hughes, B, Jönsson, B, Pols, H, Cramer, J
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: 2007
_version_ 1797105247011733504
author Seeman, E
Compston, J
Adachi, J
Brandi, M
Cooper, C
Dawson-Hughes, B
Jönsson, B
Pols, H
Cramer, J
author_facet Seeman, E
Compston, J
Adachi, J
Brandi, M
Cooper, C
Dawson-Hughes, B
Jönsson, B
Pols, H
Cramer, J
author_sort Seeman, E
collection OXFORD
description About 50% of patients fail to comply or persist with anti-osteoporosis treatment regimens within 1 year. Poor compliance is associated with higher fracture rates. Causes of poor compliance are unknown. As it is not possible to predict poor compliance, close monitoring of compliance is needed. Despite evidence supporting the anti-fracture efficacy of several pharmacological agents, approximately 50% of patients do not follow their prescribed treatment regimen and/or discontinue treatment within 1 year. Poor compliance is associated with higher fracture rates and increased morbidity, mortality and cost. However, as poor compliance, even to placebo, is associated with adverse outcomes, the higher morbidity appears to be only partly the result of lack of treatment: as yet, undefined characteristics place poor compliers at higher risk of morbidity and mortality. Only a small proportion (e.g., 6%) of the variability in compliance is explained by putative causal factors such as older age, co-morbidity or greater number of medications. Regimens with longer dosing intervals, such as weekly dosing, improve compliance, persistence and outcomes, but only modestly. As it is not possible to predict poor compliance, close monitoring of compliance should be an obligatory duty in clinical care. How this is best achieved has yet to be established, but poor persistence occurs as early as 3 months of starting treatment, indicating the need for early monitoring.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T06:44:46Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:fa7f3a2e-9d66-41c4-bbc7-930e805fa1c4
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T06:44:46Z
publishDate 2007
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:fa7f3a2e-9d66-41c4-bbc7-930e805fa1c42022-03-27T13:06:24ZNon-compliance: the Achilles' heel of anti-fracture efficacy.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:fa7f3a2e-9d66-41c4-bbc7-930e805fa1c4EnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2007Seeman, ECompston, JAdachi, JBrandi, MCooper, CDawson-Hughes, BJönsson, BPols, HCramer, JAbout 50% of patients fail to comply or persist with anti-osteoporosis treatment regimens within 1 year. Poor compliance is associated with higher fracture rates. Causes of poor compliance are unknown. As it is not possible to predict poor compliance, close monitoring of compliance is needed. Despite evidence supporting the anti-fracture efficacy of several pharmacological agents, approximately 50% of patients do not follow their prescribed treatment regimen and/or discontinue treatment within 1 year. Poor compliance is associated with higher fracture rates and increased morbidity, mortality and cost. However, as poor compliance, even to placebo, is associated with adverse outcomes, the higher morbidity appears to be only partly the result of lack of treatment: as yet, undefined characteristics place poor compliers at higher risk of morbidity and mortality. Only a small proportion (e.g., 6%) of the variability in compliance is explained by putative causal factors such as older age, co-morbidity or greater number of medications. Regimens with longer dosing intervals, such as weekly dosing, improve compliance, persistence and outcomes, but only modestly. As it is not possible to predict poor compliance, close monitoring of compliance should be an obligatory duty in clinical care. How this is best achieved has yet to be established, but poor persistence occurs as early as 3 months of starting treatment, indicating the need for early monitoring.
spellingShingle Seeman, E
Compston, J
Adachi, J
Brandi, M
Cooper, C
Dawson-Hughes, B
Jönsson, B
Pols, H
Cramer, J
Non-compliance: the Achilles' heel of anti-fracture efficacy.
title Non-compliance: the Achilles' heel of anti-fracture efficacy.
title_full Non-compliance: the Achilles' heel of anti-fracture efficacy.
title_fullStr Non-compliance: the Achilles' heel of anti-fracture efficacy.
title_full_unstemmed Non-compliance: the Achilles' heel of anti-fracture efficacy.
title_short Non-compliance: the Achilles' heel of anti-fracture efficacy.
title_sort non compliance the achilles heel of anti fracture efficacy
work_keys_str_mv AT seemane noncompliancetheachillesheelofantifractureefficacy
AT compstonj noncompliancetheachillesheelofantifractureefficacy
AT adachij noncompliancetheachillesheelofantifractureefficacy
AT brandim noncompliancetheachillesheelofantifractureefficacy
AT cooperc noncompliancetheachillesheelofantifractureefficacy
AT dawsonhughesb noncompliancetheachillesheelofantifractureefficacy
AT jonssonb noncompliancetheachillesheelofantifractureefficacy
AT polsh noncompliancetheachillesheelofantifractureefficacy
AT cramerj noncompliancetheachillesheelofantifractureefficacy