Differences in Adherence to Common Inhaled Medications in COPD

Abstract

Objective: To study differences in adherence to common inhaled medications in COPD.

Methods: Adherence of 795 patients was recorded from pharmacy records over 3 years in the COMIC cohort. It was expressed as percentage and deemed good at ≥75–≤125%, sub-optimal ≥50–<75%, and poor <50% (underuse) or >125% (overuse). Most patients used more than one medication, so we present 1379 medication periods.

Results: The percentages of patients with good therapy adherence ranged from 43.2 (beclomethasone) –75.8% (tiotropium); suboptimal from 2.3 (budesonide) –23.3% (fluticasone); underuse from 4.4 (formoterol/budesonide) –18.2% (beclomethasone); and overuse from 5.1 (salmeterol) –38.6% (budesonide). Patients using fluticasone or salmeterol/fluticasone have a 2.3 and 2.0-fold increased risk of suboptimal versus good adherence compared to tiotropium. Patients using salmeterol/fluticasone or beclomethasone have a 2.3- and 4.6-fold increased risk of underuse versus good adherence compared to tiotropium. Patients using budesonide, salmeterol/fluticasone, formoterol/budesonide, ciclesonide and beclomethasone have an increased risk of overuse versus good adherence compared to tiotropium. Adherence to inhalation medication is inversely related to lung function.

Conclusion: Therapy adherence to inhalation medication for the treatment of COPD is in our study related to the medication prescribed. Tiotropium showed the highest percentage of patients with good adherence, followed by ciclesonide, both dosed once daily. The idea of improving adherence by using combined preparations cannot be confirmed in this study. Further research is needed to investigate the possibilities of improving adherence by changing inhalation medication.

Keywords:

• COPD
• adherence
• inhalation medication
• lung function

Acknowledgments

The results of the current study were partly presented as a poster at the European Respiratory Society Annual Congress 2013, 7–11 September 2013.

Declaration of Interest Statement

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

This study was partly supported by an unrestricted research grant of Glaxo Smith Kline.

The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.