• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The journal of clinical hypertension. >Single-Pill vs Free-Equivalent Combination Therapies for Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis of Health Care Costs and Adherence
【24h】

Single-Pill vs Free-Equivalent Combination Therapies for Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis of Health Care Costs and Adherence

机译：高血压的单药与自由-等价联合疗法：卫生保健费用和依从性的荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This meta-analysis compares health care resource use costs, adherence, and persistence between groups of patients taking antihypertensives as single-pill combinations (SPCs) vs free-equivalent components (FEC) based on a structured review of published studies. The search yielded 12 retrospective database studies included in analyses. The mean difference in combined total annual all-cause and hypertension-related health care costs was $1357 (95% confidence interval [CI], $778-$1935) lower in favor of SPC than FEC groups. Adherence, measured as the mean difference in medication possession ratio, was estimated to be 8% higher for patients naive to prior antihypertensives and 14% higher for nonnaive SPC patients compared with corresponding FEC patients. Persistence in the SPC groups was twice as likely as the FEC groups (pooled risk ratio, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-4.1). Improved adherence and persistence may have contributed to the lower costs in the SPC groups via improved clinical outcomes.
机译：基于已发表研究的结构性综述，该荟萃分析比较了服用降压药作为单药组合（SPC）与游离当量成分（FEC）的患者组之间的医疗资源使用成本，依从性和持久性。该搜索产生了12项回顾性数据库研究，包括在分析中。相比于FEC组，支持SPC的年度全因和与高血压相关的医疗保健总费用的平均差额低1357美元（95％置信区间[CI]，778-1935美元）。与相应的FEC患者相比，以药物持有率的平均差异衡量的依从性对于未使用过先前降压药的患者估计要高8％，而对于未使用过SPC的患者则要高14％。 SPC组的持久性是FEC组的两倍（合并风险比为2.1; 95％CI为1.1-4.1）。改善的依从性和持久性可能通过改善临床结局来降低SPC组的成本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号