Cost savings associated with therapeutic interchange in the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension

Daniel E. Hilleman, E. C. Wadibia, Jr Lucas B.D.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The short-term outcome and cost savings of a therapeutic interchange from calcium channel blocker (CCB) monotherapy to a fixed-dose combination of bisoprolol/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) were evaluated. Sixty patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension initiated on and controlled with a single daily dose of amlodipine (n = 20), sustained-release diltiazem hydrochloride (HCl) (n = 20), or nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) (n = 20) were switched to bisoprolol/HCTZ. At the end of 3 months of follow-up after the switch, 55 of 60 (92%) patients maintained blood pressure control without dose-limiting side effects on the combination product. Mean blood pressure during CCB and bisoprolol/HCTZ treatment was not significantly different. All five treatment failures on the combination product occurred as a result of a loss of blood pressure control. Side effects were reported in 42% of patients on CCB therapy compared with 10% of bisoprolol/HCTZ therapy (P = 0.02). The cost analysis indicated that acquisition cost of the drugs was $16,868 less per year for bisoprolol/HCTZ than for CCBs. The savings were reduced by $11,724 as a result of clinic visits, laboratory testing, and side-effect management costs associated with the switch.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)563-569
Number of pages7
JournalP and T
Volume23
Issue number11
StatePublished - 1998

Fingerprint

Cost Savings
Hypertension
Calcium Channel Blockers
Blood Pressure
Therapeutics
Costs and Cost Analysis
Amlodipine
Drug Costs
Diltiazem
Nifedipine
Ambulatory Care
Treatment Failure
hydrochlorothiazide drug combination bisoprolol

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pharmacology

Cite this

Cost savings associated with therapeutic interchange in the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension. / Hilleman, Daniel E.; Wadibia, E. C.; Lucas B.D., Jr.

In: P and T, Vol. 23, No. 11, 1998, p. 563-569.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{12add1567c9f42f393942668654641df,
title = "Cost savings associated with therapeutic interchange in the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension",
abstract = "The short-term outcome and cost savings of a therapeutic interchange from calcium channel blocker (CCB) monotherapy to a fixed-dose combination of bisoprolol/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) were evaluated. Sixty patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension initiated on and controlled with a single daily dose of amlodipine (n = 20), sustained-release diltiazem hydrochloride (HCl) (n = 20), or nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) (n = 20) were switched to bisoprolol/HCTZ. At the end of 3 months of follow-up after the switch, 55 of 60 (92{\%}) patients maintained blood pressure control without dose-limiting side effects on the combination product. Mean blood pressure during CCB and bisoprolol/HCTZ treatment was not significantly different. All five treatment failures on the combination product occurred as a result of a loss of blood pressure control. Side effects were reported in 42{\%} of patients on CCB therapy compared with 10{\%} of bisoprolol/HCTZ therapy (P = 0.02). The cost analysis indicated that acquisition cost of the drugs was $16,868 less per year for bisoprolol/HCTZ than for CCBs. The savings were reduced by $11,724 as a result of clinic visits, laboratory testing, and side-effect management costs associated with the switch.",
author = "Hilleman, {Daniel E.} and Wadibia, {E. C.} and {Lucas B.D.}, Jr",
year = "1998",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "563--569",
journal = "P and T",
issn = "1052-1372",
publisher = "MediMedia USA Inc.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost savings associated with therapeutic interchange in the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension

AU - Hilleman, Daniel E.

AU - Wadibia, E. C.

AU - Lucas B.D., Jr

PY - 1998

Y1 - 1998

N2 - The short-term outcome and cost savings of a therapeutic interchange from calcium channel blocker (CCB) monotherapy to a fixed-dose combination of bisoprolol/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) were evaluated. Sixty patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension initiated on and controlled with a single daily dose of amlodipine (n = 20), sustained-release diltiazem hydrochloride (HCl) (n = 20), or nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) (n = 20) were switched to bisoprolol/HCTZ. At the end of 3 months of follow-up after the switch, 55 of 60 (92%) patients maintained blood pressure control without dose-limiting side effects on the combination product. Mean blood pressure during CCB and bisoprolol/HCTZ treatment was not significantly different. All five treatment failures on the combination product occurred as a result of a loss of blood pressure control. Side effects were reported in 42% of patients on CCB therapy compared with 10% of bisoprolol/HCTZ therapy (P = 0.02). The cost analysis indicated that acquisition cost of the drugs was $16,868 less per year for bisoprolol/HCTZ than for CCBs. The savings were reduced by $11,724 as a result of clinic visits, laboratory testing, and side-effect management costs associated with the switch.

AB - The short-term outcome and cost savings of a therapeutic interchange from calcium channel blocker (CCB) monotherapy to a fixed-dose combination of bisoprolol/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) were evaluated. Sixty patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension initiated on and controlled with a single daily dose of amlodipine (n = 20), sustained-release diltiazem hydrochloride (HCl) (n = 20), or nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) (n = 20) were switched to bisoprolol/HCTZ. At the end of 3 months of follow-up after the switch, 55 of 60 (92%) patients maintained blood pressure control without dose-limiting side effects on the combination product. Mean blood pressure during CCB and bisoprolol/HCTZ treatment was not significantly different. All five treatment failures on the combination product occurred as a result of a loss of blood pressure control. Side effects were reported in 42% of patients on CCB therapy compared with 10% of bisoprolol/HCTZ therapy (P = 0.02). The cost analysis indicated that acquisition cost of the drugs was $16,868 less per year for bisoprolol/HCTZ than for CCBs. The savings were reduced by $11,724 as a result of clinic visits, laboratory testing, and side-effect management costs associated with the switch.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032447909&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032447909&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0032447909

VL - 23

SP - 563

EP - 569

JO - P and T

JF - P and T

SN - 1052-1372

IS - 11

ER -