Table 2.
Socioeconomic characteristics and adherence measurement in the studies included in our review.
| First author, Year of publication [Reference number] | SES | Adherence | |||
| Income | Education | Employment | Measure of adherence | Adherence | |
| Laniece I., 2003 [23] | Median monthly income: 15,000 FCFA (about 20 US$) [80 (50.6%) participate in clinical trials and are free of charge] | Without school education: 50 (32%) | Not in paid employment: 65 (41%) | Self-reported number of tablets taken + number of tablets prescribed (by dispensing pharmacist), monthly. Mean and optimal (= 100% of dosage) adherence measured. | 69% of self-reports optimal. 91% mean overall adherence self-reported. |
| Mohammed H., 2004 [26] | Monthly income: 0–999 US$: 220 (80.6%) >1,000 US$: 41 (15.0%) Missing 12 (4.4%) | High school or less: 184 (67.4%) Greater than high school: 79 (28.9%) Missing: 10 (3.7%) | Employed: 59 (21.6%) Unemployed: 205 (75.1%) Missing: 9 (3.3%) | Self-report of missing doses in previous week (interview with patient). Optimal (= 100% of dosage) adherence measured. | 65.6% of self-reports optimal |
| Eldred L.J., 1998 [27] | Annual income: <$10,000 US$: 220 (91.3%) >$10,000 US$: 21 (8.7%) [All patients were insured and could cover treatment cost] | Grouped proportions not reported | No given data | Self-report of missing doses in previous week, self-report of missing days of treatment in previous 2 weeks (interview with patient) + examining medical record data of the Outpatient Clinic. Optimal (≥ 80% of doses and days) adherence measured. | Self-report vs. medical records: 60.4% vs. 55.8% optimal in previous week + 74.3% vs. 67.3% optimal in previous 2 weeks. |
| Kleeberger C.A., 2004 [24] | Grouped proportions not reported | Grouped proportions not reported | Grouped proportions not reported | Self-report of missing doses/pills in 4 previous days or not having a typical pattern in medication, every 6 months. Consecutive visit-pairs (1,128) were studied for decrease/increase in adherence from/to optimal to/from suboptimal. Optimal (= 100% of dosage) adherence measured. | 88.7% of visit-pairs remained in optimal adherence. 71.5% of visit-pairs that reported suboptimal adherence in starting visit, increased to optimal in next visit. 38.8% of patients with 4 total visits reported suboptimal adherence, at least at one visit. |
| Peretti-Watel P., 2005 [28] | Financial situation of household satisfying: 1320 (73.0%) Housing conditions satisfying/acceptable: 1566 (86.6%) Food privation in household: 197 (10.9%) | No given data | No given data | Self-report of missing doses or not respecting time schedule, in previous week (interview with patient). Optimal (= 100% of dosage/timetable) adherence measured. | 58% of self-reports optimal |
| Fong O.W., 2003 [15] | No given data | No given data | Busy workload: 16 (9.9%) | Self-report of missing doses since last follow-up, at each clinic visit Optimal (= 100% of dosage) adherence measured. Suboptimal adherence graded and measured. | 80.7% of self-reports optimal. 15.5% of self-reports suboptimal but high grade of adherence (>95%). 1.9% of self-reports low grade of adherence (<90%). |
| Kleeberger C.A., 2001 [25] | Annual income: >50,000 US$: 165 (33.0%) <50,000 US$ 335: (67.0%) | College or more: 300 (56.3%) Less than college: 233 (43.7%) | Not full time: 178 (39.4%) Full time: 274 (60.6%) | Self-report of missing doses/pills in 4 previous days or not having a typical pattern in medication. Optimal (= 100% of dosage) adherence measured. | 77.7% of self-reports optimal |
| Goldman D.P., 2002 [16] | No given data | Grouped proportions not reported | No given data | Self-report of missing doses/days of medication in previous week, on every follow-up. Optimal (= 100% of dosage) adherence measured. | Overall adherence not reported. 37.1%–57.3% optimal adherence to HAART, depending on years of schooling. |
| Golin C.E., 2002 [14] | Annual Income: <10,000 US$: 74 (63%) >10,000 US$: 43 (34%) | Less than high school: 41 (35%) High school or more: 76 (65%) | Working: 35 (30%) Not working: 82 (70%) | Evaluation of electronic medication bottle caps (MEMS) + pill count, every 4 weeks, and self-report of missing doses in the previous week, on 4 of the visits (interview with the patient). Mean and optimal (≥ 95% of dosage) adherence measured. | 4% optimal adherence reported. 71% mean overall adherence reported. |
| Singh N., 1999 [3] | Monthly income: <500$: 22 (18%) 500–1,000$: 42 (34%) 1,000–1,500$: 27 (22%) >1,500$: 27 (22%) Not stated: 5 (4.1%) | Grade school: 5(4%) Technical: 6(5%) High school: 51(42%) College: 53(42%) Postgraduate: 8(7%) | Employed: 58 (47%) Unemployed: 65 (53%) | Refill methodology, monthly (all patients filled prescriptions exclusively through site pharmacy). Optimal (≥ 90% of dosage) adherence measured. | 82% optimal adherence reported. |
| Kalichman S.C., 1999 [29] | <10,000 US$: 114 (62%) >10,000 US$: 70 (38%) | <12 years: 27 (14.7%) >12 years: 157 (85.3%) Lower health literacy TOFHLA: 29(15.8%) | No given data | Self-report of missing doses in previous 2 days (interview with patient). Mean and optimal (= 100% of dosage) adherence measured. | 80.4% of self-reports optimal. 92.6% mean overall adherence self-reported. |
| Weiser S., 2003 [30] | No given data | Primary: 14 (13%) Secondary: 45 (41%) Post-secondary: 50 (46%) | No given data | Self-report of missing doses in previous day/week/month/year (interview with patient). Optimal (≥ 95%) adherence measured. | 54% self-reports were optimal. An additional 29% of self-reports would be optimal if days of treatment hadn't been missed on financial grounds ('gaps in treatment'). |
| Morse E.V., 1991 [21] | Proportion of patients receiving economic support by 'significant other' not reported | Less than high school: 2 (5.3%) High school graduates: 12 (31.6%) College: 10 (26.3%) College degree: 11 (29%) Professional/graduate degree: 3 (7.9%) | No given data | Nurse-based measurement of the Clinical Trial participants: 20 most adherent and 20 least adherent participants. | Not applicable. |
| Gebo K.A., 2003 [31] | Running out of money for life essentials in the previous 90 days: 104 (53%) | No given data | No given data | Self-report of missing doses in the previous 2 weeks (interview with patient). Mean and optimal (≥ 90% of dosage) adherence measured. | 71% of self-reports optimal. 80% mean overall adherence self-reported. |
| Duong M., 2001 [32] | No given data | Grade school: 13 (9%) High school: 28 (19%) Technical school: 68 (46%) College: 40 (27%) | Employed: 80 (54%) Unemployed: 68 (46%) | Biological markers: HIV RNA undetectable or lower than criteria + PI plasma levels above reference. Optimal (= virologic response + adequate PI levels) adherence measured. | 89% optimal adherence reported. |
| Ickovics J.R, 2002 [4] | Average yearly income: <$19,000: 47 (50.5%) >$20,000: 46 (49.5%) | High school or less: 39(42%) College/technical school or more: 54(56%) | Work for pay outside home: Yes: 67 (72%) No: 21 (23%) Missing: 5 (5%) | Self-report of number of pills skipped in previous 4 days (interview with the patient at baseline, week 2, week 4 and every 4 weeks thereafter through to week 24). Optimal (≥ 95% of dosage) adherence was measured. | 63% of self-reports optimal. |
| Singh N., 1996 [22] | Median monthly income: 500–749 US$ No income: 5 (11%) >1,500 US$: 7 (15%) [All patients received treatment free of charge] | Less than high school: 10 (22%) High school: 9 (19%) College: 13 (28%) Technical education: 13 (28%) Postgraduate: 1 (2%) | Employed: 15 (33%) | Refill methodology, monthly (all patients filled prescriptions exclusively through site pharmacy). Optimal (≥ 80% of dosage) adherence was measured. | 63% optimal adherence reported. |