• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

单药复方降压药物初始治疗的成本效果分析。

Cost-effectiveness analysis of initial treatment with single-pill combination antihypertensive medications.

机构信息

Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.

University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.

出版信息

J Hum Hypertens. 2023 Nov;37(11):985-992. doi: 10.1038/s41371-023-00811-3. Epub 2023 Feb 15.

DOI:10.1038/s41371-023-00811-3
PMID:36792728
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10425570/
Abstract

Hypertension guidelines recommend initiating treatment with single pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive medications, but SPCs are used by only one-third of treated hypertensive US adults. This analysis estimated the cost-effectiveness of initial treatment with SPC dual antihypertensive medications compared with usual care monotherapy in hypertensive US adults.The validated BP Control Model-Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) Policy Model simulated initial SPC dual therapy (two half-standard doses in a single pill) compared with initial usual care monotherapy (half-standard dose when baseline systolic BP < 20 mmHg above goal and one standard dose when ≥20 mmHg above goal). Secondary analyses examined equivalent dose monotherapy (one standard dose) and equivalent dose dual therapy as separate pills (two half-standard doses). The primary outcomes were direct healthcare costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) over 10 years from a US healthcare sector perspective.At 10 years, initial dual drug SPC was projected to yield 0.028 (95%UI 0.008 to 0.051) more QALYs at no greater cost ($73, 95%UI -$1 983 to $1 629) than usual care monotherapy. In secondary analysis, SPC dual therapy was cost-effective vs. equivalent dose monotherapy (ICER $8 000/QALY gained) and equivalent dose dual therapy as separate pills (ICER $57 000/QALY gained). At average drug prices, initiating antihypertensive treatment with SPC dual therapy is more effective at no greater cost than usual care initial monotherapy and has the potential to improve BP control rates and reduce the burden of CVD in the US.

摘要

高血压指南建议使用单片复方制剂(SPC)降压药物进行起始治疗,但接受治疗的美国高血压成人中只有三分之一使用 SPC。本分析评估了与常规护理单药治疗相比,起始使用 SPC 双联降压药物治疗美国高血压成人的成本效益。经验证的血压控制模型-心血管疾病(CVD)政策模型模拟了起始 SPC 双联治疗(单片中两种半标准剂量)与起始常规护理单药治疗(当基线收缩压高于目标 20mmHg 以上时使用半标准剂量,当高于目标 20mmHg 以上时使用标准剂量)。二次分析检查了等效剂量单药治疗(一种标准剂量)和作为单独片剂的等效剂量双联治疗(两种半标准剂量)。主要结局指标为从美国医疗保健部门角度评估的 10 年内的直接医疗保健成本、质量调整生命年(QALY)和增量成本效益比(ICER)。10 年内,与常规护理单药治疗相比,初始双联药物 SPC 预计可使 QALY 增加 0.028(95%UI 0.008 至 0.051),且成本无增加(73 美元,95%UI -1983 美元至 1629 美元)。在二次分析中,SPC 双联治疗与等效剂量单药治疗(ICER 8000 美元/QALY 获益)和等效剂量作为单独片剂的双联治疗(ICER 57000 美元/QALY 获益)相比具有成本效益。在平均药物价格下,与常规护理单药治疗相比,使用 SPC 双联治疗起始降压治疗更有效且成本相当,有可能提高血压控制率并降低美国 CVD 的负担。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d2da/10425570/d26143c5f012/nihms-1875388-f0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d2da/10425570/ce5b64197850/nihms-1875388-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d2da/10425570/2ac76b70e9af/nihms-1875388-f0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d2da/10425570/d26143c5f012/nihms-1875388-f0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d2da/10425570/ce5b64197850/nihms-1875388-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d2da/10425570/2ac76b70e9af/nihms-1875388-f0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d2da/10425570/d26143c5f012/nihms-1875388-f0003.jpg

相似文献

1
Cost-effectiveness analysis of initial treatment with single-pill combination antihypertensive medications.单药复方降压药物初始治疗的成本效果分析。
J Hum Hypertens. 2023 Nov;37(11):985-992. doi: 10.1038/s41371-023-00811-3. Epub 2023 Feb 15.
2
Cost-effectiveness of single-pill and separate-pill administration of antihypertensive triple combination therapy: a population-based microsimulation study.基于人群的微观模拟研究:降压三联复方单片与分药治疗的成本效果比较。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Jul 6;24(1):1808. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-19346-4.
3
Comparing scale up of status quo hypertension care against dual combination therapy as separate pills or single pill combinations: an economic evaluation in 24 low- and middle-income countries.比较现状高血压护理与作为分开药丸或单片复方制剂的双重联合疗法的扩大规模情况:24个低收入和中等收入国家的经济评估。
EClinicalMedicine. 2024 Aug 27;75:102778. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102778. eCollection 2024 Sep.
4
Cost-Effectiveness of Masked Hypertension Screening and Treatment in US Adults With Suspected Masked Hypertension: A Simulation Study.美国疑似隐匿性高血压成人中隐匿性高血压筛查和治疗的成本效益:一项模拟研究。
Am J Hypertens. 2022 Aug 1;35(8):752-762. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpac071.
5
Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing single-pill combination of perindopril/amlodipine/indapamide to the free equivalent combination in patients with hypertension from an Italian national health system perspective.从意大利国家卫生体系角度比较培哚普利/氨氯地平/吲达帕胺单片复方制剂与自由等效复方制剂治疗高血压患者的成本效果分析。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2024 Oct;24(8):967-975. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2024.2365988. Epub 2024 Jun 14.
6
Fixed Low-Dose Triple Combination Antihypertensive Medication vs Usual Care for Blood Pressure Control in Patients With Mild to Moderate Hypertension in Sri Lanka: A Randomized Clinical Trial.固定低剂量三联抗高血压药物与常规护理治疗斯里兰卡轻中度高血压患者的血压控制:一项随机临床试验。
JAMA. 2018 Aug 14;320(6):566-579. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.10359.
7
The Cost-Effectiveness of Low-Cost Essential Antihypertensive Medicines for Hypertension Control in China: A Modelling Study.中国低成本基本降压药物控制高血压的成本效益:一项建模研究
PLoS Med. 2015 Aug 4;12(8):e1001860. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001860. eCollection 2015 Aug.
8
Economic evaluation of single-pill combination of indapamide and amlodipine in the treatment of arterial hypertension in the Polish setting.在波兰背景下,吲达帕胺和氨氯地平单片复方制剂治疗动脉高血压的经济学评价。
Kardiol Pol. 2015;73(9):768-80. doi: 10.5603/KP.a2015.0089. Epub 2015 May 19.
9
Adherence to triple-component antihypertensive regimens is higher with single-pill than equivalent two-pill regimens: A randomized controlled trial.与等效的两片固定复方制剂相比,单片复方制剂的三联抗高血压治疗方案的依从性更高:一项随机对照试验。
Clin Transl Sci. 2021 May;14(3):1185-1192. doi: 10.1111/cts.12979. Epub 2021 Feb 13.
10
Cost-effectiveness analysis of antihypertensive triple combination therapy among patients enrolled in a Medicare advantage plan.医疗保险优势计划患者中降压三联疗法的成本效益分析。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2021 Aug;21(4):829-836. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2020.1800457. Epub 2020 Aug 1.

引用本文的文献

1
Cost-Effectiveness of Hypertension Treatment According to 2017 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Guidelines.根据2017年美国心脏病学会和美国心脏协会指南进行高血压治疗的成本效益
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2025 Aug;18(8):e011872. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.124.011872. Epub 2025 Aug 19.
2
Trends in Antihypertensive Drug Use and Irrational Prescriptions Among Elderly Patients in China (2016-2023): A Nationwide Multi-Center Cross-Sectional Survey Study.中国老年患者(2016 - 2023年)抗高血压药物使用趋势及不合理处方情况:一项全国多中心横断面调查研究
Drug Des Devel Ther. 2025 Jul 2;19:5633-5644. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S518377. eCollection 2025.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) Statement: Updated Reporting Guidance for Health Economic Evaluations.《2022 年健康经济评估报告标准》(CHEERS 2022)声明:健康经济评估报告的更新指南。
Value Health. 2022 Jan;25(1):3-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.11.1351.
2
Cost-Effectiveness of Lipid-Lowering Treatments in Young Adults.降脂治疗在年轻人中的成本效益。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 Nov 16;78(20):1954-1964. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.08.065.
3
Initial treatment with a single pill containing quadruple combination of quarter doses of blood pressure medicines versus standard dose monotherapy in patients with hypertension (QUARTET): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial.
Treating hypertension with single pill combinations: a simple strategy to save costs for the patients and payers.
使用单片复方制剂治疗高血压:一种为患者和支付方节省成本的简单策略。
J Hypertens. 2025 Sep 1;43(9):1478-1484. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000004050. Epub 2025 Jun 16.
4
Implementing remote patient monitoring to improve hypertension control in a primary care network: Rationale and design of the monitor-BP Cluster Randomized Trial.在初级保健网络中实施远程患者监测以改善高血压控制:Monitor-BP 整群随机试验的原理与设计
Am Heart J. 2025 Oct;288:52-64. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2025.04.005. Epub 2025 Apr 8.
5
Hypertension Prevention and Healthy Life Expectancy in Black Adults: The Jackson Heart Study.黑人成年人的高血压预防与健康预期寿命:杰克逊心脏研究
Hypertension. 2025 Jun;82(6):1095-1105. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.124.23702. Epub 2025 Feb 26.
6
Efficacy of Chinese traditional quadruple single pill combination versus valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide for the treatment of hypertension (COSPQ-BP): study protocol for randomised controlled study.中药四联单片复方制剂与缬沙坦/氢氯噻嗪治疗高血压的疗效比较(COSPQ-BP):一项随机对照研究的研究方案
BMJ Open. 2025 Feb 7;15(2):e092109. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-092109.
7
Cost-Effectiveness of a Polypill for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in an Underserved Population.在服务不足人群中使用复方制剂预防心血管疾病的成本效益
JAMA Cardiol. 2025 Mar 1;10(3):224-233. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2024.4812.
8
Effect of Combination Antihypertensive Pills on Blood Pressure Control.复方降压片对血压控制的影响。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2024 Dec 3;13(23):e036046. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.124.036046. Epub 2024 Nov 27.
9
Effectiveness of Hypertension Management Strategies in SPRINT-Eligible US Adults: A Simulation Study.SPRINT 合格美国成年人高血压管理策略的有效性:一项模拟研究。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2024 Jan 16;13(2):e032370. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.123.032370. Epub 2024 Jan 12.
10
Single-Pill Combination Product Availability of the Antihypertensive Regimens Used for Intensive Systolic Blood Pressure Treatment in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial.用于强化收缩压治疗的抗高血压方案的单片复方制剂的可获得性:收缩压干预试验。
Hypertension. 2023 Aug;80(8):1749-1758. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.123.21132. Epub 2023 Jun 8.
在高血压患者中,使用包含四分之一剂量的四种降压药物的单片复方制剂进行单药初始治疗与标准剂量单药治疗的疗效比较(QUARTET):一项 3 期、随机、双盲、阳性对照试验。
Lancet. 2021 Sep 18;398(10305):1043-1052. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01922-X. Epub 2021 Aug 29.
4
Cost-Effectiveness of Hypertension Treatment by Pharmacists in Black Barbershops.高血压患者在黑人理发店接受药剂师治疗的成本效益。
Circulation. 2021 Jun 15;143(24):2384-2394. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.051683. Epub 2021 Apr 15.
5
Adherence to Single-Pill Versus Free-Equivalent Combination Therapy in Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.在高血压患者中,单药治疗与固定剂量复方治疗的依从性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Hypertension. 2021 Feb;77(2):692-705. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.120.15781. Epub 2021 Jan 4.
6
Trends in Blood Pressure Control Among US Adults With Hypertension, 1999-2000 to 2017-2018.美国成年人高血压患者血压控制趋势,1999-2000 年至 2017-2018 年。
JAMA. 2020 Sep 22;324(12):1190-1200. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.14545.
7
Cost-effectiveness analysis of antihypertensive triple combination therapy among patients enrolled in a Medicare advantage plan.医疗保险优势计划患者中降压三联疗法的成本效益分析。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2021 Aug;21(4):829-836. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2020.1800457. Epub 2020 Aug 1.
8
Impact of Self-Monitoring of Blood Pressure on Processes of Hypertension Care and Long-Term Blood Pressure Control.自我血压监测对高血压治疗过程和长期血压控制的影响。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Aug 4;9(15):e016174. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.016174. Epub 2020 Jul 22.
9
Restoring the upward trend in blood pressure control rates in the United States: a focus on fixed-dose combinations.恢复美国血压控制率的上升趋势:聚焦于固定剂量复方制剂。
J Hum Hypertens. 2020 Sep;34(9):617-623. doi: 10.1038/s41371-020-0340-6. Epub 2020 Apr 24.
10
Trends in Antihypertensive Medication Monotherapy and Combination Use Among US Adults, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2016.2005 - 2016年美国成年人抗高血压药物单一疗法和联合使用趋势,美国国家健康与营养检查调查
Hypertension. 2020 Apr;75(4):973-981. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.119.14360. Epub 2020 Mar 9.