Today, we presented an update to our Balanced Adherence Metric at the PQA Annual Meeting & Innovation Forum in Arlington, VA.
Objectively evaluating adherence is difficult. Beyond checking blood levels of the medication in question, assessments are limited to proxy measures. These measures have varying degrees of error and reliability. Due to its relative availability, metrics derived from pharmacy claims data are some of the most ubiquitous.
However, as with all proxies, no metric is perfect. Within the medication adherence literature, Proportion of Days covered has emerged as the gold standard measurement (with a cutoff of 80% distinguishing adherent from not). However, as we detail in our poster, individuals with PDC values >80% can differ dramatically in other other adherence dimensions. In particular, the number of medication gaps and the adherence trajectory over time provide a deeper level of insight beyond a single PDC value.
Our proposed BAM is not a new metric, but rather a framework and series of algorithms use to derive and display these different adherence metrics. We believe that the combination of these metrics may have a better relationship to health outcomes than either metric alone. Stay turned for more information about an upcoming academic collaboration with the University of the Sciences in Pittsburgh to test and validate these assumptions.
Director Data Science