Table 2.
Comparison of mean adherence (MPR) and proportion adherent in patients initiating ezetimibe SPC versus ezetimibe FDC
| Comparison measure | Ezetimibe SPC n = 3092 | Ezetimibe FDC n = 5219 | P‐value |
|---|---|---|---|
| MPR mean (95% CI) | 0.99 (0.98, 1.01) | 0.97 (0.95, 0.99) | |
| Mean difference SPC − FDC (95% CI) Unadjusted | 0.022 (−0.01, 0.05) | P = 0.10 | |
| Mean difference SPC − FDC (95% CI) b Adjusted | 0.008 (−0.02, 0.04) | P = 0.63 | |
| Proportion adherent: MPR ≥ 0.8 | 83.6% | 79.1% | |
| Adherent odds ratio (95% CI) Unadjusted | 1.35 (1.23, 1.51) | ref | P < 0.001a |
| Adherent odds ratio (95% CI) b Adjusted | 1.11 (0.98, 1.26) | ref | P = 0.08 |
a
P‐values < 0.05 are considered statistically significant.
b
Multivariate and logistic regression analyses includes adjustment for age, gender, number of comorbidities, safety net status, concessional beneficiary, GP prescriber, and MPR for prior statin use.
Ezetimibe FDC, cohort adding ezetimibe to simvastatin as a fixed dose combination formulation; Ezetimibe SPC, cohort adding ezetimibe as separate pill to any statin therapy; MPR, medication possession ratio