Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
Curr Med Res Opin. 2010 Sep;26(9):2065-76. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2010.494462.
To compare compliance/persistence, health care resource utilization, and costs associated with single-pill combination (SPC) vs. free-combination (FC) therapies among adult hypertension patients at the national and state level. Combination therapies with angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) + calcium channel blocker, ARB + hydrochlorothiazide, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor + hydrochlorothiazide were evaluated.
Patients initiated on SPC or FC were identified in the MarketScan Database (2006-2008). Multivariate regression models were used to compare the health care outcomes of SPC vs. FC use during the 6-month study period. National- and state-level outcomes were analyzed and reported. Compliance was measured by medication possession ratio (MPR), and persistence was assessed based on treatment discontinuation (i.e., a lapse in therapy exceeding 30 days). Utilization and cost outcomes included frequencies of inpatient and emergency room (ER) visits and changes in health care costs from baseline.
Adjusting for baseline characteristics, SPC patients (N = 382,476) demonstrated significantly higher MPR than FC patients (N = 197,375) (difference = 11.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.4%, 11.7%). SPC patients had fewer all-cause hospitalizations (adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.79) and ER visits (adjusted IRR = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.86, 0.89) than FC patients. Results for cardiovascular-related utilization were similar to all-cause results. Compared to FC, SPC patients showed significantly greater reductions post-therapy initiation in all-cause medical costs by -$208 (95% CI: -$302, -$114), but larger increases in hypertension-related prescription costs by $53 (95% CI: $51, $55). State-level results were generally consistent in magnitude and direction for comparisons of compliance and utilization, with greater regional variation in costs. Limitations include the possibility of residual confounding from factors not observable in claims.
SPC use was associated with significantly better compliance/persistence and fewer hospitalizations and ER visits than FC in hypertensive patients at the national level and in almost all states. Larger reductions in medical costs with SPC use more than offset higher drug costs within most states.
在全国和州级水平上比较高血压患者使用单片复方制剂(SPC)与自由联合复方制剂(FC)治疗的依从性/持久性、医疗资源利用和成本。评估了包含血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)+钙通道阻滞剂、ARB+氢氯噻嗪和血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂+氢氯噻嗪的联合治疗。
在 MarketScan 数据库(2006-2008 年)中确定使用 SPC 或 FC 的患者。使用多变量回归模型比较了 6 个月研究期间 SPC 与 FC 使用的医疗结果。分析并报告了全国和州级的结果。通过药物使用比例(MPR)衡量依从性,根据治疗中断(即超过 30 天的治疗中断)评估持久性。利用和成本结果包括住院和急诊室(ER)就诊的频率以及从基线开始的医疗费用变化。
调整基线特征后,SPC 患者(N=382476)的 MPR 显著高于 FC 患者(N=197375)(差异=11.6%;95%置信区间[CI]:11.4%,11.7%)。SPC 患者全因住院(调整发病率比[IRR]=0.77;95%CI:0.75,0.79)和 ER 就诊(调整 IRR=0.87;95%CI:0.86,0.89)的次数均少于 FC 患者。心血管相关利用的结果与全因结果相似。与 FC 相比,SPC 患者在治疗开始后全因医疗费用显著降低了$208(95%CI:$302,$114),但高血压相关处方药费用增加了$53(95%CI:$51,$55)。在比较依从性和利用时,州级结果在幅度和方向上通常一致,但成本的区域差异较大。局限性包括索赔中无法观察到的因素可能存在残余混杂。
在全国范围内和大多数州,与 FC 相比,高血压患者使用 SPC 治疗的依从性/持久性更好,住院和 ER 就诊次数更少。在大多数州,SPC 治疗的医疗费用降低幅度较大,足以抵消大部分药物成本的增加。