4.5 Article

Electronic measurement of adherence to pediatric antiretroviral therapy in South Africa

期刊

PEDIATRIC INFECTIOUS DISEASE JOURNAL
卷 27, 期 3, 页码 257-262

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/INF.0b013e31815b1ad4

关键词

pediatric adherence; antiretroviral therapy; resource-limited setting; Medication Event Monitoring System

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Little is known about adherence to pediatric antiretroviral regimens in countries of the developing world. Both assessment methods and predictors of adherence need to be examined to deliver appropriate health care to the growing patient population in resource-limited settings. Methods: We conducted a prospective study of adherence in a pediatric HIV outpatient clinic in Cape Town, South Africa. Adherence was assessed by the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS) and caregiver self-report by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Virologic response was recorded at study baseline and closest follow-up visit, child and caregiver data were collected by questionnaires. Results: For 73 children followed, median adherence by MEMS was 87.5%, median caregiver reported adherence was 100%. MEMS and caregiver report differed in reporting excellent (> 95%) adherence, with MEMS classifying 36% of subjects in this category, whereas caregiver report classified 91%. Overall, 65% of children achieved virologic suppression after the study period. MEMS adherence was significantly associated with virologic suppression. The highest specificity was obtained when adjusting the data for doses taken at the prescribed time (91.3%). No predictors for the differences between MEMS and caregiver reported adherence could be identified. Conclusions: Adherence to pediatric antiretroviral regimens in South Africa is not lower than in the developed world, yet not high enough to guarantee long-term treatment success. Caregiver report seems unreliable in this setting. MEMS is a feasible and accurate measure of adherence for children on liquid drug formulations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据