The validity of self-reported primary adherence among Medicaid patients discharged from the emergency department with a prescription medication

Ru Ding, Scott Zeger, Donald M. Steinwachs, Melinda J. Ortmann, Melissa L. McCarthy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Study objective: We determine the validity of self-reported prescription filling among emergency department (ED) patients. Methods: We analyzed a subgroup of 1,026 patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial who were prescribed at least 1 medication at ED discharge, were covered by Medicaid insurance, and completed a telephone interview 1 week after the index ED visit. We extracted all pharmacy and health care use claims information from a state Medicaid database for all subjects within 30 days of their index ED visit. We used the pharmacy claims as the criterion standard and evaluated the accuracy of self-reported prescription filling obtained during the follow-up interview by estimating its sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio tests. We also examined whether the accuracy of self-reported prescription filling varied significantly by patient and clinical characteristics. Results: Of the 1,635 medications prescribed, 74% were filled according to the pharmacy claims. Subjects reported filling 90% of prescriptions for a difference of 16% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14% to 18%). The self-reported data had high sensitivity (0.96; 95% CI 0.95 to 0.97) but low specificity (0.30; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.34). The positive likelihood ratio (1.37; 95% CI 1.29 to 2.46) and negative likelihood ratio (0.13; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.17) tests indicate that self-reported data are not a good indicator of prescription filling but are a moderately good indicator of nonfulfillment. Several factors were significantly associated with lower sensitivity (drug class and over-the-counter medications) and specificity (drug class, as needed, site and previous ED use). Conclusion: Self-reported prescription filling is overestimated and associated with few factors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)225-234
Number of pages10
JournalAnnals of Emergency Medicine
Volume62
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2013

Fingerprint

Medicaid
Prescriptions
Hospital Emergency Service
Confidence Intervals
Interviews
Nonprescription Drugs
Insurance
Randomized Controlled Trials
Databases
Delivery of Health Care
Sensitivity and Specificity
Pharmaceutical Preparations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine

Cite this

The validity of self-reported primary adherence among Medicaid patients discharged from the emergency department with a prescription medication. / Ding, Ru; Zeger, Scott; Steinwachs, Donald M.; Ortmann, Melinda J.; McCarthy, Melissa L.

In: Annals of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 62, No. 3, 09.2013, p. 225-234.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ef7574e63d42403cab449b48dc8c942f,
title = "The validity of self-reported primary adherence among Medicaid patients discharged from the emergency department with a prescription medication",
abstract = "Study objective: We determine the validity of self-reported prescription filling among emergency department (ED) patients. Methods: We analyzed a subgroup of 1,026 patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial who were prescribed at least 1 medication at ED discharge, were covered by Medicaid insurance, and completed a telephone interview 1 week after the index ED visit. We extracted all pharmacy and health care use claims information from a state Medicaid database for all subjects within 30 days of their index ED visit. We used the pharmacy claims as the criterion standard and evaluated the accuracy of self-reported prescription filling obtained during the follow-up interview by estimating its sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio tests. We also examined whether the accuracy of self-reported prescription filling varied significantly by patient and clinical characteristics. Results: Of the 1,635 medications prescribed, 74{\%} were filled according to the pharmacy claims. Subjects reported filling 90{\%} of prescriptions for a difference of 16{\%} (95{\%} confidence interval [CI] 14{\%} to 18{\%}). The self-reported data had high sensitivity (0.96; 95{\%} CI 0.95 to 0.97) but low specificity (0.30; 95{\%} CI 0.26 to 0.34). The positive likelihood ratio (1.37; 95{\%} CI 1.29 to 2.46) and negative likelihood ratio (0.13; 95{\%} CI 0.09 to 0.17) tests indicate that self-reported data are not a good indicator of prescription filling but are a moderately good indicator of nonfulfillment. Several factors were significantly associated with lower sensitivity (drug class and over-the-counter medications) and specificity (drug class, as needed, site and previous ED use). Conclusion: Self-reported prescription filling is overestimated and associated with few factors.",
author = "Ru Ding and Scott Zeger and Steinwachs, {Donald M.} and Ortmann, {Melinda J.} and McCarthy, {Melissa L.}",
year = "2013",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.01.026",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "62",
pages = "225--234",
journal = "Annals of Emergency Medicine",
issn = "0196-0644",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The validity of self-reported primary adherence among Medicaid patients discharged from the emergency department with a prescription medication

AU - Ding, Ru

AU - Zeger, Scott

AU - Steinwachs, Donald M.

AU - Ortmann, Melinda J.

AU - McCarthy, Melissa L.

PY - 2013/9

Y1 - 2013/9

N2 - Study objective: We determine the validity of self-reported prescription filling among emergency department (ED) patients. Methods: We analyzed a subgroup of 1,026 patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial who were prescribed at least 1 medication at ED discharge, were covered by Medicaid insurance, and completed a telephone interview 1 week after the index ED visit. We extracted all pharmacy and health care use claims information from a state Medicaid database for all subjects within 30 days of their index ED visit. We used the pharmacy claims as the criterion standard and evaluated the accuracy of self-reported prescription filling obtained during the follow-up interview by estimating its sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio tests. We also examined whether the accuracy of self-reported prescription filling varied significantly by patient and clinical characteristics. Results: Of the 1,635 medications prescribed, 74% were filled according to the pharmacy claims. Subjects reported filling 90% of prescriptions for a difference of 16% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14% to 18%). The self-reported data had high sensitivity (0.96; 95% CI 0.95 to 0.97) but low specificity (0.30; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.34). The positive likelihood ratio (1.37; 95% CI 1.29 to 2.46) and negative likelihood ratio (0.13; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.17) tests indicate that self-reported data are not a good indicator of prescription filling but are a moderately good indicator of nonfulfillment. Several factors were significantly associated with lower sensitivity (drug class and over-the-counter medications) and specificity (drug class, as needed, site and previous ED use). Conclusion: Self-reported prescription filling is overestimated and associated with few factors.

AB - Study objective: We determine the validity of self-reported prescription filling among emergency department (ED) patients. Methods: We analyzed a subgroup of 1,026 patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial who were prescribed at least 1 medication at ED discharge, were covered by Medicaid insurance, and completed a telephone interview 1 week after the index ED visit. We extracted all pharmacy and health care use claims information from a state Medicaid database for all subjects within 30 days of their index ED visit. We used the pharmacy claims as the criterion standard and evaluated the accuracy of self-reported prescription filling obtained during the follow-up interview by estimating its sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio tests. We also examined whether the accuracy of self-reported prescription filling varied significantly by patient and clinical characteristics. Results: Of the 1,635 medications prescribed, 74% were filled according to the pharmacy claims. Subjects reported filling 90% of prescriptions for a difference of 16% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14% to 18%). The self-reported data had high sensitivity (0.96; 95% CI 0.95 to 0.97) but low specificity (0.30; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.34). The positive likelihood ratio (1.37; 95% CI 1.29 to 2.46) and negative likelihood ratio (0.13; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.17) tests indicate that self-reported data are not a good indicator of prescription filling but are a moderately good indicator of nonfulfillment. Several factors were significantly associated with lower sensitivity (drug class and over-the-counter medications) and specificity (drug class, as needed, site and previous ED use). Conclusion: Self-reported prescription filling is overestimated and associated with few factors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84882816652&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84882816652&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.01.026

DO - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.01.026

M3 - Article

C2 - 23507090

AN - SCOPUS:84882816652

VL - 62

SP - 225

EP - 234

JO - Annals of Emergency Medicine

JF - Annals of Emergency Medicine

SN - 0196-0644

IS - 3

ER -