Validating methods used to identify non‐adherence adverse drug events in Canadian administrative health data

Abstract

AbstractAimsMedication non‐adherence is a type of adverse drug event that can lead to untreated and exacerbated chronic illness, and that drives healthcare utilization. Research using medication claims data has attempted to identify instances of medication non‐adherence using the proportion of days covered or by examining gaps between medication refills. We sought to validate these measures compared to a gold standard diagnosis of non‐adherence made in hospital.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of adverse drug events diagnosed during three prospective cohorts in British Columbia between 2008 and 2015 (n = 976). We linked prospectively identified adverse drug events to medication claims data to examine the sensitivity and specificity of typical non‐adherence measures.ResultsThe sensitivity of the non‐adherence measures ranged from 22.4% to 37.5%, with a proportion of days covered threshold of 95% performing the best; the non‐persistence measures had sensitivities ranging from 10.4% to 58.3%. While a 7‐day gap was most sensitive, it classified 61.2% of the sample as non‐adherent, whereas only 19.6% were diagnosed as such in hospital.ConclusionsThe methods used to identify non‐adherence in administrative databases are not accurate when compared to a gold standard diagnosis by healthcare providers. Research that has relied on administrative data to identify non‐adherent patients both underestimates the magnitude of the problem and may label patients as non‐adherent who were in fact adherent.