
==== Front
BMJ Open Respir Res
BMJ Open Respir Res
bmjresp
bmjresp
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
2052-4439
BMJ Publishing Group BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR

39304207
10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001964
bmjresp-2023-001964
Systematic Review
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
1506
Medication adherence to inhalation therapy and the risk of COPD exacerbations: a systematic review with meta-analysis
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8932-476X
Vauterin Delphine 1Delphine.Vauterin@UGent.be

Van Vaerenbergh Frauke 1Frauke.Vanvaerenbergh@UGent.be

Grymonprez Maxim 1maxim.grymonprez@ugent.be

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5902-917X
Vanoverschelde Anna 12Anna.Vanoverschelde@UGent.be

Lahousse Lies 12lies.lahousse@ugent.be

1 Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Department of Bioanalysis, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
2 Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Additional supplemental material is published online only. To view, please visit the journal online (https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001964).

Outside this manuscript, LL received a consulting fee paid to her institution from AstraZeneca, GSK and Sanofi and has given a lecture sponsored by Chiesi. Outside this manuscript, LL and MG have given lectures sponsored by IPSA vzw, a non-profit organisation facilitating lifelong learning for healthcare providers. Neither author has received any fees personally. LL is an unpaid member of European Respiratory Society and Belgian Respiratory Society, member of Faculty Board of Ghent University–Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences and faculty committees.

Professor; lies.lahousse@ugent.be
2024
19 9 2024
11 1 e00196418 7 2023
03 9 2024
Copyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Abstract

Background

Assessing medication adherence is crucial in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management to prevent exacerbations. However, it is unclear whether this association between adherence and exacerbations is influenced by the adherence assessment methods or thresholds used. Electronic healthcare databases are valuable to study exacerbations and adherence in real life. We aimed to systematically review the literature to identify adherence assessment methods and thresholds used in healthcare databases when investigating the association between medication adherence and COPD exacerbations and to meta-analyse the associated effect sizes.

Method

MEDLINE, Web of Science and Embase were searched for peer-reviewed articles, written in English, published up to 10 October 2022 (PROSPERO: CRD42022363449). Two reviewers independently conducted screening for inclusion and performed data extraction. A qualitative approach described the adherence assessment methods and thresholds used. A quantitative approach (meta-analysis using random effects model) estimated the association between adherence and the risk of COPD exacerbations.

Results

Eight studies were included in the systematic review of which five studies were included in the meta-analysis. The medication possession ratio (MPR) and the proportion of days covered (PDC) were the adherence assessment methods used and 0.80 was always used as threshold to differentiate good from poor adherence. Adherence and exacerbations were mostly measured over the same time period. Poor adherence (MPR or PDC<0.80) was significantly associated with a higher COPD exacerbation risk (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.62, I2=85%), regardless of the adherence assessment method used. Results were consistent when stratified by exacerbation severity. Poor adherence was also associated with a time-dependent risk of COPD exacerbations (incidence rate ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.46).

Conclusion

Our systematic review with meta-analysis demonstrated a 40% increased risk of COPD exacerbations in case of poor adherence to inhaler medication.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42022363449.

COPD Pharmacology
COPD Exacerbations
COPD epidemiology
==== Body
pmcWHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC

Adherence to inhaler medication is crucial in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management to prevent exacerbations. The use of different methods to measure adherence and/or different adherence thresholds may result in different adherence values and/or proportions of adherent patients. It is unclear whether the association between adherence and COPD exacerbations can be demonstrated in healthcare databases and whether this observed association is influenced by the adherence assessment method or threshold used.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

When meta-analysing studies assessing adherence to COPD medications (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification code R03) and exacerbations in electronic healthcare databases, poor medication adherence (<0.80) was significantly associated with a higher probability of exacerbation occurrence (both moderate and severe exacerbations) and a higher frequency of severe exacerbations. The association between poor adherence and the risk of at least one COPD exacerbation was not impacted by the adherence assessment method used (medication possession ratio or proportion of days covered).

HOW THIS STUDY MIGHT AFFECT RESEARCH, PRACTICE OR POLICY

Electronic healthcare databases are a valuable resource to quickly identify poor adherent patients. These patients should be targeted for adherence interventions because our study demonstrated that, regardless of the adherence assessment methods used, poor adherence (<0.80) was associated with a 40% increased risk of COPD exacerbations.

Introduction

Exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are defined in the 2024 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) report as episodes of acute respiratory symptom (dyspnoea and/or cough and sputum) worsening.1 These events represent a significant economic burden, affect disease morbidity and are linked to lung function deterioration.13 Poor adherence to pharmacological treatment has been associated with an increased risk of exacerbations and increased healthcare use.1 2 There is considerable variability in adherence rates calculated by different studies. Yet, medication adherence in patients with COPD is generally low, with adherence rates ranging from 7% to 78%.4 5 Adherence rates may vary depending on study type6 (clinical trials generally show higher rates than clinical practice), data source5 (self-reported estimates are generally higher than objective measures) and disease severity. In cases of advanced disease, the inhaled medication may be perceived as more necessary by the patient resulting in higher adherence values,7 although other studies have shown lower adherence in patients with multiple COPD treatments.8

Numerous methods to measure medication adherence exist.912 Consequently, it can be challenging to select the most appropriate assessment method.13 In addition, questions have been raised about the arbitrary cut-off point of 0.80 to categorise between good and poor adherence,14 and multiple cut-offs5 are currently used. The use of different methods to measure adherence and/or different adherence thresholds contributes to the large difference in adherence values and/or proportions of adherent patients between studies.5 15

Electronic healthcare databases are a valuable resource to investigate exacerbations and medication adherence in real life, as they are easy to use, inexpensive and relevant to evaluate clinical outcomes.16 17 They have the advantage to investigate adherence and exacerbations without recall, reporting and/or response bias, which are important influencing factors in measuring adherence16 18 and exacerbations.19

To the best of our knowledge, there is no overview of the existing literature on the association between adherence and COPD exacerbations based on data from electronic healthcare databases and the adherence assessment methods and thresholds used in these studies. Moreover, it is unclear whether the association between adherence and COPD exacerbations can be demonstrated in healthcare databases and whether this observed association between adherence and exacerbations is influenced by the adherence assessment methods or thresholds used. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review literature on the association between adherence and COPD exacerbations to identify the most frequently used adherence assessment methods and thresholds based on data from electronic healthcare databases. Second, we aimed to summarise the corresponding effect sizes in a meta-analysis. We hypothesise that poor adherence is linked to an increased risk of exacerbations.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.20 The protocol of this study was registered on PROSPERO21 (registration number: CRD42022363449).

Definition of adherence and exacerbation severity

While undertaking this review, medication adherence was defined as the extent to which a patient uses medication as recommended (taking into account the dosing regimen) over a specific period of time. This corresponds to the implementation part of the adherence process as defined by the Ascertaining Barriers for Compliance taxonomy for medication adherence.22 23 Definitions for COPD exacerbations and classification of severity were based on the GOLD 2023 report.1 Severe exacerbations were defined as COPD-related hospitalisations, whereas moderate exacerbations were defined as events requiring treatment with oral corticosteroids and/or antibiotics in an outpatient setting.1

Literature search and search strategy

Three databases (MEDLINE using the PubMed interface, Web of Science and Embase using the Embase.com interface) were extensively searched using search terms based on the following concepts: COPD, medication adherence, exacerbation and electronic healthcare database (summarised in online supplemental eTables 1–3). The search extended from inception of the database to 10 October 2022. Reference lists and citations of included studies were manually checked to identify other relevant articles.

Study inclusion criteria

Peer-reviewed studies, written in English, were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review. There was no restriction on the date of publication. Study populations were limited to patients with COPD. Only studies reporting the association between adherence to COPD maintenance therapy (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification code R03) with a defined adherence threshold and the risk of COPD exacerbations were included. The study population identification, the adherence assessment and detection of exacerbations had to be based on an electronic healthcare database (eg, electronic healthcare records, medication prescription claims, pharmacy dispensing claims). Moreover, exacerbations had to be identified in the same time period or in a subsequent time period as the adherence assessment. Exacerbations needed to be stratified by exacerbation severity, comparable with the GOLD classification of exacerbation severity.1 A complete overview of the inclusion and exclusion criteria can be found in online supplemental eTable 4.

Study selection

Two reviewers (DV and FVV) performed an independent screening of the title and abstract followed by full-text evaluation, using Rayyan software.24 Conflicts were resolved by a consensus meeting with a senior researcher (LL). Reviewers were blinded to each other’s decisions. The Cohen’s kappa coefficient25 was calculated to determine the inter-rater reliability.

Quality assessment

The quality assessment was completed by the two reviewers (DV and FVV) independently, and discrepancies were discussed in a consensus meeting with the senior researcher (LL). Each included study was judged for their quality using the quality assessment tool ‘QUALSYST’ from the ‘Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields’ (chapter 3—online supplemental appendix).26 Studies were included for meta-analysis if scoring at least 75% on the quality assessment.

Data extraction

A standardised data extraction table was developed to extract the study characteristics (study design, data collection method, factors for COPD diagnosis and recruitment setting), the baseline characteristics of the included population (sample size, age), the characteristics of the medication adherence assessment (medication assessed, measurement method, time period of assessment, threshold for differentiation between good and poor adherence) and the effect measures (exacerbation outcome, time period of assessment, time relation to adherence, statistics performed, results and adjustment factors/covariates) of the included studies. The table was pilot tested on three studies and refined by the two reviewers (DV and FVV). Subsequently, one reviewer (DV) performed the data extraction for all included studies, the other reviewer (FVV) checked the extracted data. Any disagreements were resolved by mutual agreement. When information or data were unclear or missing, the corresponding author of the included study was contacted.

Data analysis

A two-way approach was used for data synthesis: a qualitative descriptive approach to provide an overview of the extracted study characteristics with the medication adherence assessment methods and thresholds used in the included studies, and a quantitative approach (meta-analysis) to estimate the association between adherence and COPD exacerbations. A meta-analysis was performed on the risk of COPD exacerbations, separately for the occurrence of an exacerbation (risk of at least one exacerbation; exacerbator vs no exacerbator) and the time-dependent risk of COPD exacerbations (time to first severe exacerbation and/or frequency of exacerbations). A random effects model with the inverse-variance weighting method was used, and results were presented visually in a forest plot. Heterogeneity was tested using the Cochran’s Q-test, the between-study variance τ² (Paule-Mandel estimator)27 and the I² statistic (which was considered to be low (<30%), moderate (30–60%) or high (>60%)). The effect sizes from each included study were reported as ORs for the risk of at least one exacerbation, and incidence rate ratios (IRR) for the time-dependent risk of COPD exacerbations. All effect sizes were presented with their 95% CI. The association between adherence and COPD exacerbations was investigated between the adherent group (reference) and poor adherent group (comparator). For studies with effect sizes expressed with the poor adherent group as reference, data conversions were performed. The risk of publication bias at the outcome level for the studies included in the meta-analyses was assessed by funnel plot asymmetry and by Egger’s regression test. As a subgroup analysis, results were stratified by exacerbation severity. Moreover, the impact of different adherence assessment methods and adherence thresholds was investigated as a sensitivity analysis. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis was performed including studies that were initially excluded based on their quality score. A two-sided p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed with the meta package in R (R V.4.2.3 with RStudio V.2023.03.1 build 446).28 29

Results

Search results and quality assessment

After duplicates were removed, a total of 1365 unique studies were identified. After title and abstract screening, 66 studies were selected (Cohen’s κ=0.58). After full-text assessment, six studies were included (Cohen’s κ=0.68). In addition, two studies were included after identification in the reference and citation lists of the identified studies. Consequently, eight studies were included in the systematic review.

The assigned scores for the quality assessment ranged from 68% to 95% and are shown in online supplemental eTable 5. Due to a quality score of <75%, the studies by Fan et al,30 Humenberger et al31 and Punekar et al32 were excluded from the meta-analysis. Consequently, five studies were included in the meta-analysis (figure 1).

Figure 1 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram.

Study characteristics

The general characteristics of the eight included studies are presented in table 1. Half of the included studies were conducted in North America,8 30 33 34 while other studies were performed in Europe31 32 35 or Asia.36 The sample size varied from 357 to 45 937 included patients with COPD. The diagnosis of COPD was mainly based on an age criterium,83033 35 associated with a diagnosis code (all included studies) and medication use (all included studies). Online supplemental eTable 6 provides an overview of the inclusion criteria of the different studies. Patients were selected based on only hospital data,31 only outpatient data83234 36 or both.30 35

Table 1 General characteristics of the eight included studies

Author	Year	Country	Study design	Sample size	Age	Adherence assessment method	Threshold	Proportion of adherent patients	
Chen et al36	2020	China	RetrospectiveObservational cohort	11 708	No age minimum, no mean/median/range presented	PDC	≥0.80 (sensitivity analysis for cut-off at 0.50)	10.8% in total;36.3% in LABA and/or LAMA group,26.4% in LABA/ICS group and 1.8% in oral mucolytic therapy group	
Davis et al33	2017	USA	RetrospectiveObservational cohort	13 657	≥40 years, mean age of 67 years	PDC	Adherent: PDC≥0.80,mildly non-adherent: 0.50≤PDC<0.80, moderately non-adherent:0.30≤PDC<0.50 andhighly non-adherent: PDC<0.30	13.9% in LABA/ICS group	
Fan et al30	2003	USA	ProspectiveObservational cohort	8033	≥45 years	% of days supplied during fixed time period of 90 days	>0.80	33% in ICS group	
Humenberger et al31	2018	Austria	RetrospectiveObservational cohort	357	>40 years, mean age of 66.5 years (SD 10.6)	MPR	Complete adherence: >0.80, partial adherence: 0.50–0.80 and low adherence: <0.50	33.6% in total (LAMA, LABA, LABA/ICS, LABA/LAMA and LABA/LAMA/ICS users together)	
Ismaila et al8	2014	Canada	RetrospectiveObservational cohort	23 707	≥40 years, mean age of 73.2 years (SD 10.3)	MPR	≥0.80	61.1% in LAMA monotherapy group, 62.9% to LAMA in LABA/LAMA/ICS group and 35.4% to LABA/ICS in LABA/LAMA/ICS group	
Mueller et al35	2017	Germany	RetrospectiveObservational cohort	45 937	≥40 years, mean age of 71.4 years (SD 11.4)	MPR	≥0.80	30.0% in total; 38.0% in LABA group, 53.2% in LAMA group, 20.4% in ICS group and 26.8% in LABA/ICS group	
Punekaret al32	2015	UK	RetrospectiveObservational cohort	17 529	≥40 years	MPR	≥0.80	34% in LABA group; 42% in LAMA group and 34% in LABA/ICS group	
Wurst et al34	2014	USA	RetrospectiveObservational cohort	3268	≥40 to 65 years, mean age of 55.8 years (SD 5.4)	MPR and PDC	≥0.80	29.4% in LABA group and 37.1% in LAMA group	
ICSinhaled corticosteroidsLABAlong-acting beta agonistLAMAlong-acting muscarinic antagonistMPRmedication possession ratioPDCproportion of days covered

Adherence assessment

Adherence assessment was based on the proportion of days covered (PDC, the number of days covered during a fixed time period),33 34 36 the medication possession ratio (MPR, the sum of days supplied during a patient-specific time period (eg, time between first and last prescriptions))8 31 32 34 35 or a variance of MPR/PDC (percentage of days supplied during a fixed time period)30 (online supplemental eTable 7). All studies used a cut-off point of 0.80 to categorise between good and poor adherence. Davis et al33 and Humenberger et al31 applied additional cut-off points to further divide the poor adherence group.

Exacerbation assessment

The majority of included studies assessed both moderate and severe exacerbations.830 3234 36 In contrast, the study by Mueller et al35 evaluated only moderate exacerbations and the study by Humenberger et al31 evaluated only severe exacerbations. An overview of the definitions of moderate and severe exacerbations used in each included study is available in online supplemental eTable 8. Adherence and exacerbation occurrence were measured over the same period of time in all included studies, except in the studies by Fan et al30 (adherence in 90 days before occurrence of exacerbation) and Mueller et al35 (exacerbations assessed in second half of 12-month adherence assessment period).

Association between adherence and COPD exacerbations

Results of all included studies are tabulated in online supplemental eTable 8. The reported effect sizes were adjusted for possible confounders (online supplemental eTable 6), including the exacerbation history (proxied by the number of preindex hospitalisations or emergency department visits for COPD exacerbations8 30 32 33 36 and/or the number of preindex prescriptions for short-acting bronchodilators,8 30 32 33 35 36 antibiotics8 30 33 36 and/or oral corticosteroids8 30 33 36). In the study by Wurst et al,34 no effect measures were available because only descriptive analyses were performed but the effect size (OR) could be calculated.

To investigate the impact of adherence on the risk of at least one exacerbation, four studies were included in a meta-analysis, while two studies were included in another meta-analysis to examine the impact of adherence on the frequency of exacerbations. No publication bias was suspected based on the visual inspection of the funnel plot (online supplemental eFigures 1 and 2) and Egger’s regression tests, although the interpretability was limited due to inclusion of less than 10 studies.

Meta-analysis on risk of at least one COPD exacerbation

Poor adherence (MPR or PDC<0.80) was significantly associated with a higher odds of exacerbation occurrence (pooled effect estimate: OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.62, I2=85%). The subgroup analysis based on exacerbation severity showed consistent results (figure 2). Poor adherence was associated with a significantly higher odds of moderate exacerbations (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.04) and severe exacerbations (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.43) (p value of 0.25 for test for subgroup differences). Results were consistent in a sensitivity analysis using the MPR or PDC for adherence assessment (online supplemental eFigure 3). Since all included studies used the cut-off point of 0.80 to categorise good and poor adherence, the impact of different adherence thresholds could not be assessed.

Figure 2 Subgroup meta-analysis based on exacerbation type for impact of adherence on exacerbation occurrence probability (random effects model). ADH, adherent group; ICS, inhaled corticosteroid; IV, inverse-variance; LABA, long-acting beta agonist; LAMA, long-acting muscarinic antagonist; PADH, poor adherent group.

Meta-analysis on time-dependent risk of COPD exacerbations

Poor adherence (PDC<0.80) was also significantly associated with a higher frequency of severe COPD exacerbations (pooled estimated effect: IRR 1.31, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.46, online supplemental eFigure 4). There were insufficient data to perform meta-analysis for moderate exacerbations or for a sensitivity analysis investigating the influence of the adherence assessment method or adherence threshold.

Sensitivity analysis incorporating excluded studies

In a sensitivity analysis incorporating the study of Humenberger et al,31 poor adherence (MPR or PDC<0.80) remained significantly associated with a higher odds of exacerbation occurrence (pooled estimated effect: OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.56). However, in the subgroup analyses based on exacerbation severity, the pooled estimated effect was no longer significant for severe exacerbations (online supplemental eFigure 5a). The sensitivity analysis on the time-dependent risk of COPD exacerbations trended to a similar association between poor adherence (MPR or PDC<0.80) and the risk of COPD exacerbation (pooled estimated effect: exacerbation risk 1.16, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.42), although no longer significant (online supplemental eFigure 5b).

Discussion

Our systematic review based on eight studies investigating the relationship between medication adherence and COPD exacerbations in electronic healthcare databases observed that adherence assessment was mainly based on the MPR, PDC or a variation of these methods. All included studies used a binary cut-off (0.80) to differentiate between good and poor adherence, although some studies added extra cut-offs to distinguish several groups of poor adherent patients.31 33 In our meta-analyses, we have demonstrated that poor adherence was associated with an increased risk of COPD exacerbations, both in occurrence and frequency.

The observed adherence assessment methods, MPR and PDC, were also the most prevalent methods in previous research in patients with asthma9 or in reviews focusing on oral dosages17 or on polypharmacy.37 In contrast to the review of Asamoah-Boaheng et al,9 we did not consider the ratio of units of controller medication to the sum of units of controller medication and rescue medication (known as the asthma medication ratio) or the COPD treatment ratio as a measure of adherence. While it can be a valuable parameter in assessing disease control by treatment,38 it is not designed to optimally measure adherence.

Approximately 30% of the patients with COPD showed good adherence in the included studies. This is in line with previous research, concluding that adherence rates in asthma and COPD varied widely depending on study type and disease severity.4 6 7 The results of our meta-analysis summarise the existing evidence of the association between adherence and COPD exacerbations in observational studies using electronic healthcare databases and validate previously published observations.3941 Measuring adherence in observational studies is of particular value given that interventional studies (eg, randomised clinical trials) are characterised by restrictive inclusion and exclusion criteria and close follow-up of patients. This may result in adherence outcomes that are generally less reflective for real life.6

To compare the risk of COPD exacerbations among adherent versus poor adherent patients, potential confounders should be well balanced between the two groups. Therefore, we excluded studies with poor quality from the main analysis. A first important potential confounder is the level of disease severity (airflow limitation). If more severely ill patients are more adherent, the association between adherence and COPD exacerbations may be confounded by this factor as more severely ill patients are more at risk for exacerbations.31 This could explain why the sensitivity analysis, including studies previously excluded based on their quality score, was no longer significant. Second, previously published research showed that the exacerbation history is the strongest predictor of future exacerbations.1 42 All studies included in the meta-analysis adjusted their effect sizes for exacerbation history, except for the study by Wurst et al34 (which included incident patients with COPD).

Based on figure 2, it could be suggested that the effect of adherence to inhaled corticosteroids has a stronger influence on the risk of COPD exacerbations compared with long-acting bronchodilators. However, incident patients in the study by Wurst et al34 might have had a milder disease, while patients in the other studies have higher exacerbation risks related to more moderate or severe disease. Differences in the risk of COPD exacerbations between adherent patients and poor adherent patients may become more apparent in patients with moderate to severe disease, which may explain the observed difference between medication classes. To the best of our knowledge, no studies explored the association of medication adherence and the risk of COPD exacerbations in subgroups stratified by disease severity, and further research is therefore recommended.

The pooled estimated effect for moderate exacerbations was numerically higher than severe exacerbations (56% vs 32% higher odds, respectively), although no significant difference between subgroups (p=0.25 for test for subgroup differences) was observed. This means that the exacerbation severity did not modify the effect of poor adherence on the probability of COPD exacerbation occurrence. This small difference in pooled estimated effect may be explained by the higher prevalence of moderate exacerbations43 and other risk factors influencing the need for hospitalisation, such as the socioeconomic status44 and access to healthcare and/or health-seeking behaviour, which may vary between countries.45

Strength and limitations

Our systematic review is, to the best of our knowledge, the first to provide an overview of adherence assessment methods and thresholds used on data from electronic healthcare databases to investigate the association between adherence and COPD exacerbations and to summarise the associated effect sizes. However, a limitation of this systematic review, which may have resulted in studies with valid results being missed, was the exclusion of non-English language studies; although an extensive search strategy was used. Moreover, our inclusion criteria were based but not limited to validated definitions, although validation of algorithms to identify patients with COPD or COPD exacerbations in electronic healthcare databases exists.4648 However, to the best of our knowledge, no validated algorithm is available that can be generally used in all electronic healthcare databases.

As adherence and exacerbations in all studies included in the meta-analysis assessed both parameters in the same time period, our results can only inform on an association but not on causation. Poor adherence is associated with an increased risk of COPD exacerbations.1 On the other hand, adherence may increase after an exacerbation,49 50 or in contrast exacerbations may lower adherence.51 Therefore, a reverse causation between adherence and exacerbations cannot be excluded.

Since all included studies eligible for the meta-analysis on the impact of adherence on exacerbation occurrence used the cut-off point of 0.80 to distinguish between good and poor adherence, the impact of other adherence thresholds could not be assessed. Similar research in patients with asthma showed that adherence values ≥0.50 were associated with a reduced risk of asthma exacerbations.9

In addition, our results do not present the impact of the medication classes separately on the association between poor adherence and the risk of a COPD exacerbation, as we have pooled the effect sizes independently of the medication class studied. Furthermore, we excluded studies focused on short-acting bronchodilators only. This medication class can be used as add-on therapy for mild exacerbations, possibly interfering the association investigated in this systematic review.1

Only the study of Humenberger et al31 used spirometry to inform COPD diagnosis and study inclusion. All other studies based COPD diagnosis on age, diagnosis codes registered and medication use. Electronic healthcare databases are characterised by some limitations such as the probability of coding errors, the inability to confirm if the patient actually has COPD or used the dispensed medication and the lack of information about the inhaler technique, spirometry results, patient-specific characteristics and laboratory values, such as blood eosinophil levels. Consequently, we were not able to confirm diagnosis of COPD nor appropriateness of medication. Furthermore, it should be noted there may be factors that influence the risk of COPD exacerbations that have not been taken into account when assessing the relationship between medication adherence and COPD exacerbations, such as smoking status.52 These limitations have to be taken into account.

Recommendations for clinical practice

As only observational studies were included in our research, our results must be interpreted with caution based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework.53 Nevertheless, some recommendations seem appropriate. Although the association between poor adherence and the risk of COPD exacerbations is generally known,1 our research is, to the best of our knowledge, the first to summarise studies assessing this relationship in electronic healthcare databases. These resources are useful in clinical practice to objectively and quickly identify poor adherent patients.54 It may be recommended to link an initial screening for non-adherent patients in an electronic database to an in-depth adherence assessment with assessment of the inhaler technique. Verified poor adherent patients with COPD could be targeted for adherence interventions (such as supportive telephone calls55), as our study demonstrated that, regardless of the adherence assessment methods used, poor adherence (<0.80) was associated with a 40% increased risk of COPD exacerbations.

Research gaps

Adherence and COPD exacerbations were measured in the same time period for studies included in the meta-analysis. To further explore the impact of adherence on COPD exacerbations, research may investigate the long-term impact of adherence by assessing COPD exacerbations in a subsequent period of time.

The impact of other adherence thresholds other than 0.80 could not be assessed. Further research to validate the cut-off point of 0.80 in COPD is needed. Moreover, a second cut-off may be needed to assess the impact of overuse (MPR or PDC>1.20) on COPD exacerbations, which has been associated with an increased risk of severe COPD exacerbations as well.56 In addition, further research should determine if these thresholds are independent of the exacerbation severity, the adherence assessment used and the medication class studied.

Conclusions

Our systematic review with meta-analysis demonstrated an increased risk of COPD exacerbations by poor adherence to inhaler medication, regardless of the adherence assessment method used. Results were consistent when stratified by exacerbation severity and highlight the importance of systematically screening adherence in patients with COPD.

supplementary material

10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001964 online supplemental file 1

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Nele Pauwels, PhD, a methodologist from the Knowledge Center for Health Ghent, Ghent University, Belgium, for her advice concerning the methodology of this systematic review.

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.

Funding: The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Patient consent for publication: Not applicable.

Ethics approval: Not applicable.
==== Refs
References

1 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) Global strategy for prevention, diagnosis and management of copd: 2024 report 2024
2 Hogea S-P Tudorache E Fildan AP et al Risk factors of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations Clin Respir J 2020 14 183 97 10.1111/crj.13129 31814260
3 Rennard SI Farmer SG Exacerbations and progression of disease in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Proc Am Thorac Soc 2004 1 88 92 10.1513/pats.2306026 16113418
4 Mäkelä MJ Backer V Hedegaard M et al Adherence to inhaled therapies, health outcomes and costs in patients with asthma and COPD Respir Med 2013 107 1481 90 10.1016/j.rmed.2013.04.005 23643487
5 Bhattarai B Walpola R Mey A et al Barriers and Strategies for Improving Medication Adherence Among People Living With COPD: A Systematic Review Respir Care 2020 65 1738 50 10.4187/respcare.07355 32576706
6 Tashkin DP Amin AN Kerwin EM Comparing Randomized Controlled Trials and Real-World Studies in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Pharmacotherapy Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2020 15 1225 43 10.2147/COPD.S244942 32581529
7 George M Adherence in Asthma and COPD: New Strategies for an Old Problem Respir Care 2018 63 818 31 10.4187/respcare.05905 29794213
8 Ismaila A Corriveau D Vaillancourt J et al Impact of adherence to treatment with tiotropium and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases patients Curr Med Res Opin 2014 30 1427 36 10.1185/03007995.2014.908828 24666181
9 Asamoah-Boaheng M Osei Bonsu K Farrell J et al Measuring Medication Adherence in a Population-Based Asthma Administrative Pharmacy Database: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Clin Epidemiol 2021 13 981 1010 10.2147/CLEP.S333534 34712061
10 Jia X Zhou S Luo D et al Effect of pharmacist-led interventions on medication adherence and inhalation technique in adult patients with asthma or COPD: A systematic review and meta-analysis J Clin Pharm Ther 2020 45 904 17 10.1111/jcpt.13126 32107837
11 López-Campos JL Quintana Gallego E Carrasco Hernández L Status of and strategies for improving adherence to COPD treatment Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2019 14 1503 15 10.2147/COPD.S170848 31371936
12 Vauterin D Van Vaerenbergh F Vanoverschelde A et al Methods to assess COPD medications adherence in healthcare databases: a systematic review Eur Respir Rev 2023 32 230103 10.1183/16000617.0103-2023 37758274
13 Karve S Cleves MA Helm M et al Prospective validation of eight different adherence measures for use with administrative claims data among patients with schizophrenia Value Health 2009 12 989 95 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00543.x 19402852
14 Baumgartner PC Haynes RB Hersberger KE et al A Systematic Review of Medication Adherence Thresholds Dependent of Clinical Outcomes Front Pharmacol 2018 9 1290 10.3389/fphar.2018.01290 30524276
15 Malo S Aguilar-Palacio I Feja C et al Different approaches to the assessment of adherence and persistence with cardiovascular-disease preventive medications Curr Med Res Opin 2017 33 1329 36 10.1080/03007995.2017.1321534 28422521
16 Anghel LA Farcas AM Oprean RN An overview of the common methods used to measure treatment adherence Med Pharm Rep 2019 92 117 22 10.15386/mpr-1201 31086837
17 Andrade SE Kahler KH Frech F et al Methods for evaluation of medication adherence and persistence using automated databases Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2006 15 565 74 10.1002/pds.1230 16514590
18 Vitolins MZ Rand CS Rapp SR et al Measuring adherence to behavioral and medical interventions Cont Clin Trials 2000 21 188S 94S 10.1016/s0197-2456(00)00077-5
19 Sullivan PW Ghushchyan VH Campbell JD et al Measuring the cost of poor asthma control and exacerbations J Asthma 2017 54 24 31 10.1080/02770903.2016.1194430 27286240
20 Page MJ McKenzie JE Bossuyt PM et al The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews BMJ 2021 372 71 10.1136/bmj.n71
21 NIHR International prospective register of systematic reviews (prospero) available from Available https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero Accessed 9-May-2023
22 Vrijens B De Geest S Hughes DA et al A new taxonomy for describing and defining adherence to medications Br J Clin Pharmacol 2012 73 691 705 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04167.x 22486599
23 Vrijens B Dima AL Van Ganse E et al What We Mean When We Talk About Adherence in Respiratory Medicine J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2016 4 802 12 10.1016/j.jaip.2016.05.019 27587314
24 Ouzzani M Hammady H Fedorowicz Z et al Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews Syst Rev 2016 5 210 10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 27919275
25 McHugh ML Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2012 22 276 82 23092060
26 Kmet L Cook L R L The quality assessment tool ‘qualsyst’ from the 'standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields.' 2004 Available https://www.ihe.ca/download/standard_quality_assessment_criteria_for_evaluating_primary_research_papers_from_a_variety_of_fields.pdf
27 Veroniki AA Jackson D Viechtbauer W et al Methods to estimate the between-study variance and its uncertainty in meta-analysis Res Synth Methods 2016 7 55 79 10.1002/jrsm.1164 26332144
28 Balduzzi S Rücker G Schwarzer G How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial Evid Based Ment Health 2019 22 153 60 10.1136/ebmental-2019-300117 31563865
29 Tawfik GM Dila KAS Mohamed MYF et al A step by step guide for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis with simulation data Trop Med Health 2019 47 46 10.1186/s41182-019-0165-6 31388330
30 Fan VS Bryson CL Curtis JR et al Inhaled corticosteroids in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and risk of death and hospitalization: time-dependent analysis Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003 168 1488 94 10.1164/rccm.200301-019OC 14525798
31 Humenberger M Horner A Labek A et al Adherence to inhaled therapy and its impact on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) BMC Pulm Med 2018 18 163 10.1186/s12890-018-0724-3 30340565
32 Punekar YS Landis SH Wurst K et al Characteristics, disease burden and costs of COPD patients in the two years following initiation of long-acting bronchodilators in UK primary care Respir Res 2015 16 141 10.1186/s12931-015-0295-2 26572740
33 Davis JR Wu B Kern DM et al Impact of Nonadherence to Inhaled Corticosteroid/LABA Therapy on COPD Exacerbation Rates and Healthcare Costs in a Commercially Insured US Population Am Health Drug Benefits 2017 10 92 102 28626506
34 Wurst KE St Laurent S Mullerova H et al Characteristics of patients with COPD newly prescribed a long-acting bronchodilator: a retrospective cohort study Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2014 9 1021 31 10.2147/COPD.S58258 25285002
35 Mueller S Wilke T Bechtel B et al Non-persistence and non-adherence to long-acting COPD medication therapy: A retrospective cohort study based on a large German claims dataset Respir Med 2017 122 1 11 10.1016/j.rmed.2016.11.008 27993284
36 Chen R Gao Y Wang H et al Association Between Adherence to Maintenance Medication in Patients with COPD and Acute Exacerbation Occurrence and Cost in China: A Retrospective Cohort Database Study Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2020 15 963 71 10.2147/COPD.S234349 32440108
37 Pednekar PP Ágh T Malmenäs M et al Methods for Measuring Multiple Medication Adherence: A Systematic Review-Report of the ISPOR Medication Adherence and Persistence Special Interest Group V Health 2019 22 139 56 10.1016/j.jval.2018.08.006
38 Stanford RH Korrer S Brekke L et al Validation and Assessment of the COPD Treatment Ratio as a Predictor of Severe Exacerbations Chronic Obstr Pulm Dis 2020 7 38 48 10.15326/jcopdf.7.1.2019.0132 31999901
39 Vestbo J Anderson JA Calverley PMA et al Adherence to inhaled therapy, mortality and hospital admission in COPD Thorax 2009 64 939 43 10.1136/thx.2009.113662 19703830
40 Wu H Zhang H Li X et al Effects of medication adherence on disease activity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis Psychol Health Med 2023 28 1656 70 10.1080/13548506.2022.2141277 36343098
41 van Boven JFM Chavannes NH van der Molen T et al Clinical and economic impact of non-adherence in COPD: a systematic review Respir Med 2014 108 103 13 10.1016/j.rmed.2013.08.044 24070566
42 Hurst JR Han MK Singh B et al Prognostic risk factors for moderate-to-severe exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic literature review Respir Res 2022 23 213 10.1186/s12931-022-02123-5 35999538
43 Whittaker H Rubino A Müllerová H et al Frequency and Severity of Exacerbations of COPD Associated with Future Risk of Exacerbations and Mortality: A UK Routine Health Care Data Study Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2022 17 427 37 10.2147/COPD.S346591 35264849
44 Halpin DM Miravitlles M Metzdorf N et al Impact and prevention of severe exacerbations of COPD: a review of the evidence Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2017 12 2891 908 10.2147/COPD.S139470 29062228
45 Whittaker H Van Ganse E Dalon F et al Differences in severe exacerbations rates and healthcare utilisation in COPD populations in the UK and France BMJ Open Respir Res 2022 9 e001150 10.1136/bmjresp-2021-001150
46 Rothnie KJ Müllerová H Hurst JR et al Validation of the Recording of Acute Exacerbations of COPD in UK Primary Care Electronic Healthcare Records PLoS One 2016 11 e0151357 10.1371/journal.pone.0151357 26959820
47 Mapel DW Sama SR Roblin DW et al Validation of a US health insurance claims-based algorithm to identify acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2020 29 394
48 Gershon AS Wang C Guan J et al Identifying Individuals with Physcian Diagnosed COPD in Health Administrative Databases COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 2009 6 388 94 10.1080/15412550903140865 19863368
49 Cvietusa PJ Goodrich GK Shoup JA et al Effect of an Asthma Exacerbation on Medication Adherence J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2023 11 248 54 10.1016/j.jaip.2022.10.014 36280138
50 Williams LK Peterson EL Wells K et al Quantifying the proportion of severe asthma exacerbations attributable to inhaled corticosteroid nonadherence J Allergy Clin Immunol 2011 128 1185 91 10.1016/j.jaci.2011.09.011 22019090
51 Homętowska H Świątoniowska-Lonc N Klekowski J et al Treatment Adherence in Patients with Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022 19 11573 10.3390/ijerph191811573 36141843
52 Au DH Bryson CL Chien JW et al The effects of smoking cessation on the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations J Gen Intern Med 2009 24 457 63 10.1007/s11606-009-0907-y 19194768
53 Guyatt GH Oxman AD Vist GE et al GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations BMJ 2008 336 924 6 10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD 18436948
54 Canfield SL Zuckerman A Anguiano RH et al Navigating the Wild West of Medication Adherence Reporting in Specialty Pharmacy J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2019 25 1073 7 10.18553/jmcp.2019.25.10.1073 31556829
55 Gregoriano C Dieterle T Breitenstein A-L et al Does a tailored intervention to promote adherence in patients with chronic lung disease affect exacerbations? A randomized controlled trial Respir Res 2019 20 273 10.1186/s12931-019-1219-3 31796013
56 Koehorst-Ter Huurne K Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG vanderValk PD et al Association between poor therapy adherence to inhaled corticosteroids and tiotropium and morbidity and mortality in patients with COPD Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2018 13 1683 90 10.2147/COPD.S161374 29872286
