Hypertension affects millions of Americans. With healthcare dollars becoming more closely scrutinized, economic studies are playing an important role in helping decision makers choose who should receive treatment and which treatments and methods of administration are most cost-effective. This article provides an overview of the different methods used in economic evaluation and demonstrates the utility of each method using studies from the hypertension literature.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
WilberJABarrowJG. Hypertension—a community problem. Am J Med1972; 52: 653–63.
2.
1987 heart facts. Dallas: American Heart Association, Winter 1987.
3.
An epidemiological investigation of cardiovascular disease. In: KannelWBGordonT, eds. The Framingham study, section 26. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1970.
4.
An epidemiological investigation of cardiovascular disease. In: KannelWBGordonT, eds. The Framingham study, section 30. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1974. DHEW publication no. (NIH) 74–599.
5.
StasonWB. Opportunities for improving the cost-effectiveness of antihypertensive treatment. Am J Med1986; 81 (suppl 6C): 45–9.
6.
DrummondMSmithGTWellsN. Economic evaluation in the development of medicines. London: Office of Health Economics. 1988.
7.
DraugalisJRBootmanJLLarsonLNMcGhanWF. Current concepts: Pharmacoeconomics. Kalamazoo, MI: The Upjohn Company, 1989.
8.
DrummondMFStoddartGLTorranceGW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.
9.
McCarronDAHareLEWalkerBR. Therapeutic and economic controversies in antihypertensive therapy. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol1984; 6 (suppl 5): S837–40.
10.
HannanELGrahamJK. A cost-benefit study of a hypertension screening and treatment program at the work setting. Inquiry1978: 15: 345–57.
11.
Statistical bulletin. New York: Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. 1974; 55 (1): 6–8.
12.
AldermanMHDavisTK. Hypertension control at the work site. J Occup Med1976; 18: 793–6.
13.
MalcolmLAKawachiIJacksonRBonitaR. Is the pharmacological treatment of mild to moderate hypertension cost effective in stroke prevention?N Z Med J1988; 101: 167–71.
14.
ChristiansonJBKrishanINobregaFTDavisCSSmoldtRKHarrisAM. The Mayo three-community hypertension control program v. cost-effectiveness of intervention. Mayo Clin Proc1981; 56: 11–6.
15.
LoganAGMilneBJAchberCCampbellWPHaynesRB. Cost-effectiveness of a worksite hypertension treatment program. Hypertension1981; 3: 211–8.
16.
OsterGHuseDMDeleaTESavageDDColditzGA. Cost effectiveness of labetalol and propranolol in the treatment of hypertension among blacks. J Natl Med Assoc1987: 79: 1049–55.
17.
MillarJAHansenPC. The economics of treating mild hypertension (letter). N Z Med J1988; 101: 275.
18.
EdgarMASchniedenH. The economics of mild hypertension programmes. Soc Sci Med1989; 28: 211–22.
19.
Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Hypertensive Agents. Comparison of propranolol and hydrochlorothiazide for the initial treatment of hypertension: Results of short-term titration with emphasis on racial differences in response. JAMA1982; 248: 1996–2003.
20.
FlamenbaumWWeberMAMcMahonFG, Monotherapy with labetalol compared with propranolol: Differential effects by race. J Clin Hypertens1985; 1: 56–69.
21.
SaundersECurryCLHindsJE, Labetalol compared to propranolol in the treatment of black hypertensive patients. J Clin Hypertens1987; 3: 294–302.
22.
CubberleyRB. Labetalol as monotherapy in hypertensive black patients. J Clin Hypertens1985; 4: 304–14.
23.
RussellLB. Cost-effectiveness of antihypertensive treatment general considerations. Hypertension1989; 13 (suppl 1): I141–4.
24.
StasonWBWeinsteinMC. Allocation of resources to manage hypertension. N Engl J Med1977; 296: 732–9.
25.
CroogSHLevineSTestaMA, The effects of antihypertensive therapy on the quality of life. N Engl J Med1986; 314: 1657–64.
26.
TestaMA. Interpreting quality-of-life clinical trial data for use in the clinical practice of antihypertensive therapy. J Hypertension1987; 5 (suppl 1): S9–13.
27.
BulpittCJFletcherAE. Quality of life in hypertensive patients on different antihypertensive treatments: Rationale for methods employed in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol1985; 7 (suppl 1): S137–45.
28.
CaldwellJRCobbSDowlingMDDejonghD. The dropout problem in antihypertensive treatment: A pilot study of social and emotional factors influencing a patient's ability to follow antihypertensive treatment. J Chron Dis1970; 22: 579–92.
29.
HarlanWR. Economic considerations that influence health policy and research. Hypertension1989; 13 (suppl I): I158–63.
30.
SteinwachsDM. Cost-effectiveness analysis: Role in evaluation of alternatives for improving high blood pressure control. MD State Med J1984; 33: 225–7.
31.
ShulmanNBMartinezBBroganDCarrAAMilesCG. Financial cost as an obstacle to hypertension therapy. Am J Public Health1986; 76: 1105–8.
