Comparing cost-effectiveness analyses of anti-hypertensive drug therapy for decision making: Mission impossible?

Value in Health

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 359-371

  Mullins, C Daniel ^a,c   Blak, Betina T ^a   Akhras, Kasem S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF PHARMACY   (United States)

^b PFIZER INC   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; Decision making; Guidelines; Hypertension

Indexed keywords

ANGIOTENSIN 2 RECEPTOR ANTAGONIST; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; CALCIUM CHANNEL BLOCKING AGENT; DIPEPTIDYL CARBOXYPEPTIDASE INHIBITOR; DIURETIC AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONGESTIVE HEART FAILURE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIASTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; DRUG COST; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KIDNEY DISEASE; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; META ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIDE EFFECT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STROKE; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 0042525692     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2002.54142.x     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press 1996.
2. Burt VL, Whelton P, Rocella EJ et al. Prevalence of hypertension in the US adult population. Results from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-91. Hypertension 1995;25:305-13.
3. The Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. National High Blood Pressure Education Program. Arch Intern Med 1997;157:2413-46.
4. The United States National Vital Statistics Reports. 2000;48:6-7.
5. American Heart Association. http://www.americanheart.org/statistics/10econom.html. First accessed September 18, 2000.
6. Grabowski H, Mullins CD. Pharmacy benefit management, cost-effectiveness analysis and drug formulary decisions. Soc Sci Med 1997;45:535-44.
7. Graf Von Der Schulenburg JM. Economical evaluation of medical technologies: from theory to practice - the German perspective. Soc Sci Med 1997;45:621-33.
8. Sloan FA, Whetten-Goldstein K, Wilson A. Hospital pharmacy decisions, cost containment, and the use of cost-effectiveness analysis. Soc Sci Med 1997;45:523-33.
9. Gricar JA, Langley PC, Luce L et al. Format for formulary submission. A format for submission of clinical and economic data in support of formulary consideration by managed health care systems in the United States. Academy of Managed Care (AMCP) October 2000.
10. Johanneson M, Jonsson B. Cost-effectiveness analysis of hypertension treatment - a review of methodological issues. Health Policy 1991;19:55-78.
11. Blaufox MD, Middleton ML, Bongiovanni J, Davis BR. Cost efficacy of the diagnosis and therapy of renovascular hypertension. J Nucl Med 1996;37:171-7.
12. Shepard DS, Hodgkin D. Cost effectiveness of intensive treatment of hypertension. Am J Manag Care 1998;4:S765-70.
13. Raikou M, Gray A, Briggs A et al. The UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Cost effectiveness analysis of improved blood pressure control in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 40. BMJ 1998;317:720-6.
14. Andersson F, Kartman B, Andersson OK. Costeffectiveness of felodipine-metoprolol (Logimax) and enalapril in the treatment of hypertension. Clin Exp Hypertens 1998;20:833-46.
15. Cook JR, Glick HA, Gerth W, Kinosian B, Kostis JB. The cost and cardioprotective effects of enalapril in hypertensive patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Am J Hypertens 1998;11:1433-41.
16. Elliott WJ, Weir DR, Black HR. Cost-effectiveness of the lower treatment goal (of JNC VI) for diabetic hypertensive patients. Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Arch Intern Med 2000;160:1277-83.
17. Johannesson M. The cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment in Sweden: an analysis of the criteria for intervention and the choice of drug treatment. J Hum Hypertens 1996;10:S23-6.
18. Johannesson M, Meltzer D, O'Conor RM. Incorporating future costs in medical cost-effectiveness analysis, implications for the cost-effectiveness of the treatment of hypertension. Med Decis Making 1997;17:382-9.
19. Milne RJ, Vander Hoorn S, Jackson RT. A predictive model of the health benefits and cost effectiveness of celiprolol and atenolol in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in hypertensive patients. Pharmacoeconomics 1997;12:384-408.
20. Plans-Rubio P. Cost-effectiveness of cardiovascular prevention programs in Spain. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1998;14:320-30.
21. Roth MS, Davenport RC, Simpson W Jr. Assessing the economic value of anti-hypertensive medications. Am J Manag Care 1998;4:1267-75.
22. Kannel WB. Risk stratification in hypertension. New insights from the Framingham Study. Am J Hypertens 2000;13:S3-10.
23. Healey M, Deverka P, Fox S et al. Panel 1: methodological issues in conducting pharmacoeconomic evaluations - clinical studies. Value Health 1999;2:73-81.
24. Burton WN, Conti DJ, Chen CY et al. The role of health risk factors and disease on worker productivity. J Occup Environ Med 1999;41:863-77.
25. Rizzo JA, Simons WR. Variations in compliance among hypertensive patients by drug class: implications for health care costs. Clin Ther 1997;19:1446-57.
26. Hay J, Jackson J, Luce B et al. Panel 2: methodological issues in conducting pharmacoeconomic evaluations - modeling studies. Value Health 1999;2:78-81.