E-DRUG: The terms compliance and concordance
--------------------------------------------
Dear E-druggers:
I've come late to this exchange about compliance and concordance (forgive
any duplication), but as a member of the UK concordance coordinating group,
I must say that the group - including many of the authors of the original
report - is quite clear that concordance is *not* a replacement nor a
synonym for compliance. Pat Bush is quite right in this respect. I dislike
'compliance' with a suggestion of patients bending to the doctor's will,
but (like Patient) it is useful.
However, pursuing John Urquhart's point below, British (and other!)
proponents of concordance are not oblivious to the regimens with strong
scientific support. The question is whether patients choose to take their
medicines or not. That decision is not in the hands of clinicians, and it
is by sharing and if necessary changing beliefs about the effectiveness and
potential harms of medicines that concordance (ie agreement about
treatment) aims to promote improved compliance (ie adherence to
scientifically proven regimes).
For a fuller (& more coherent) argument, see our recent letter in BMJ:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7212/787
David Dickinson MA FRSA
Principal, *Consumation*
***Consumer information design***
53 Hosack Road, London SW17 7QW
fax 0181 355 7811, tel 0181 673 4403
mobile 0966 271 832
david.dickinson@consumation.com
--
Send mail for the `E-Drug' conference to `e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'.
Mail administrative requests to `majordomo@usa.healthnet.org'.
For additional assistance, send mail to: `owner-e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'.