Self-measurement of blood pressure at home reduces the need for antihypertensive drugs: a randomized, controlled trial.

It is still uncertain whether one can safely base treatment decisions on self-measurement of blood pressure. In the present study, we investigated whether antihypertensive treatment based on self-measurement of blood pressure leads to the use of less medication without the loss of blood pressure control. We randomly assigned 430 hypertensive patients to receive treatment either on the basis of self-measured pressures (n=216) or office pressures (OPs; n=214). During 1-year follow-up, blood pressure was measured by office measurement (10 visits), ambulatory monitoring (start and end), and self-measurement (8 times, self-pressure group only). In addition, drug use, associated costs, and degree of target organ damage (echocardiography and microalbuminuria) were assessed. The self-pressure group used less medication than the OP group (1.47 versus 2.48 drug steps; P<0.001) with lower costs ($3222 versus $4420 per 100 patients per month; P<0.001) but without significant differences in systolic and diastolic OP values (1.6/1.0 mm Hg; P=0.25/0.20), in changes in left ventricular mass index (-6.5 g/m(2) versus -5.6 g/m(2); P=0.72), or in median urinary microalbumin concentration (-1.7 versus -1.5 mg per 24 hours; P=0.87). Nevertheless, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure values at the end of the trial were higher in the self-pressure than in the OP group: 125.9 versus 123.8 mm Hg (P<0.05) for systolic and 77.2 versus 76.1 mm Hg (P<0.05) for diastolic blood pressure. These data show that self-measurement leads to less medication use than office blood pressure measurement without leading to significant differences in OP values or target organ damage. Ambulatory values, however, remain slightly elevated for the self-pressure group.

Cost effectiveness of an adherence-improving programme in hypertensive patients.

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to antihypertensive drugs is high, and the economic consequences of non-adherence may be substantial. The Medication Events Monitoring System (MEMS), which is a method to improve adherence, has been shown to be a useful tool for the management of adherence problems. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost effectiveness of the MEMS compared with usual care in a population of hypertensive patients with poor adherence. The MEMS programme consisted of provision of containers fitted with electronic caps together with adherence training if indicated. METHODS: In a randomised controlled trial, 164 hypertensive patients in the experimental strategy and 89 patients in the usual care strategy were followed for 5 months. Patients who had a systolic blood pressure (SBP) > or = 160 mm Hg and/or diastolic BP (DBP) > or = 95 mm Hg despite the use of antihypertensive drugs were eligible. Patients were recruited by a GP, and treatment took place in general practice. In the experimental strategy, electronic monitoring of the intake of antihypertensive drugs was introduced without change of medication. Unsatisfactory adherence was defined as < 85% of days with the number of doses taken as prescribed. In the usual care strategy, antihypertensive treatment was intensified by the addition or change of antihypertensive drugs, if necessary, without provision of an electronic monitor. Outcome parameters included the proportion of patients with normalised blood pressure (NBP) at 5 months and QALYs. Costs were quantified from the healthcare and societal perspective. Non-parametric bootstrap simulations were performed to quantify the uncertainty around the mean estimates and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were presented. In addition, a number of univariate sensitivity analyses were performed on deterministic variables. RESULTS: At 5 months, 3.1% (95% UI [uncertainty interval] -9.7%, +15.8%) more patients had NBP, and 0.003 (95% UI -0.005, +0.010) more QALYs were generated in the experimental strategy. A statistically significant lower percentage of patients had a dose escalation in the experimental strategy. Irrespective of the ceiling ratio for cost effectiveness, the cost-effectiveness probability was between 75% and 80% for the analysis from the healthcare perspective using proportion of patients with NBP as the outcome parameter. For the analysis from the societal perspective using QALYs as the outcome parameter, this probability was between 45% and 51%. CONCLUSION: For a time horizon of 5 months, a difference in both cost and effect could not be detected between an adherence-improving programme compared with usual care for hypertensive patients. The probability that the adherence-improving programme is cost effective is at best moderate. Moreover, the cost-effectiveness result is surrounded with considerable uncertainty and large-scale implementation warrants additional research into the economic consequences of this intervention. Patients may benefit from the use of a MEMS monitor in situations where BP targets are not reached because of suspected non-adherence and both patient and GP are reluctant to increase the dose or number of antihypertensive drugs.

Economic evaluation of duloxetine for the treatment of women with stress urinary incontinence: a Markov model comparing pharmacotherapy with pelvic floor muscle training.

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine is a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor and may be useful for treating women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in general practice. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of 2 duloxetine strategies (duloxetine alone and duloxetine after inadequate response to pelvic floor muscle training [PFMT]) compared with PFMT or no treatment for women aged>or=50 years with SUI. METHODS: A Markov model with a 3-month cycle length was developed, with a time horizon of 5 years. Incontinence severity was based on incontinence episode frequency per week (IEF/week). Four SUI health states were distinguished in the model: no SUI (0 incontinence episode [IE] per week), mild SUI (19 IEs/week), moderate SUI (10-25 IEs/week), and severe SUI (>or=26 IEs/week). Transition probabilities were calculated, based on published evidence, expert opinion, and demographic data. Outcomes were expected total societal costs and expected IEs. The analysis was performed from the societal perspective of The Netherlands, and all costs were reported in year-2002 euros. One-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In the model, providing PFMT cost euro0.03/IE avoided, compared with no treatment. Duloxetine after inadequate PFMT cost euro3.81/IE avoided, compared with PFMT One-way sensitivity analyses indicated that these results were robust regarding variation in age, IEF/week, and discount rate. Below the ceiling ratio of euro3.65/IE avoided, PFMT had the highest probability of being cost-effective. With higher ceiling ratios, duloxetine after inadequate PFMT had the highest cost-effectiveness probability. CONCLUSIONS: Treating patients with duloxetine after inadequate PFMT response yielded additional health effects in the model, but would require society in The Netherlands to pay euro3.81/IE avoided for women aged>or=50 years with SUI being treated in general practice. It is up to policy-makers to determine whether this ratio would be acceptable.

Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and a reluctance to lose.

Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) are a method used to present uncertainty surrounding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Construction of the curves relies on the assumption that the willingness to pay (WTP) for health gain is identical to the willingness to accept (WTA) health loss. The objective of this paper is to explore the impact that differences between WTP and WTA health changes have on CEACs. Previous empirical evidence has shown that the relationship between WTP and WTA is not 1:1. The discrepancy between WTP and WTA for health changes can be expressed as a ratio: the accept/reject ratio (which can vary between 1 and infinity). Depending on this ratio, the area within the southwest quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane in which any bootstrap cost-effect pairs will be considered to be cost effective will be smaller, resulting in a lower CEAC. We used data from two clinical trials to illustrate that relaxing the 1:1 WTP/WTA assumption has an impact on the CEACs. Given the difficulty in assessing the accept/reject ratio for every evaluation, we suggest presenting a series of CEACs for a range of values for the accept/reject ratio, including 1 and infinite. Although it is not possible to explain this phenomenon within the extra-welfarist framework, it has been shown empirically that individuals give a higher valuation to the removal of effective therapies than to the introduction of new therapies that are more costly and effective. In cost-effectiveness analyses where uncertainty of the ICER covers the southwest quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane, the discrepancy between societies' WTP and WTA should be indicated by drawing multiple CEACs.

Changing characteristics of first-time hearing aid applicants in The Netherlands in the past decade.

This study assessed changes in the characteristics of first-time hearing aid applicants in the past decade. Age, gender, date, type and ear of first hearing aid and audiometry were determined for a sample of 705 first-time hearing aid applicants. Thirteen cohorts resulted, according to the year of first visit to the dispenser. Differences in age, hearing loss, gender and type and ear of first hearing aid between cohorts were analysed. The mean age of first-time hearing aid users increased from 59.52 years in 1987 to 71.84 years in 1999. The mean pure-tone average hearing loss in the better ear (1, 2 and 4kHz) decreased from 69.06 dB in 1987 to 51.86dB in 1999. Relatively more males than females were fitted with hearing aids. Our conclusions are that people are being fitted with hearing aids at older ages and with smaller degrees of hearing loss.

Societal effects of hearing aid fitting among the moderately hearing impaired.

The objective of this study was to evaluate hearing aid fitting from a societal viewpoint, rather than the more traditional patient perspective. The effects of hearing aid fitting on generic quality of life (EuroQol), social functioning (SF36), auditory disability, productivity at paid and unpaid labour, and medical consumption, were assessed in a prospective study among 80 moderately hearing-impaired first-time hearing aid applicants. The study showed that hearing aid fitting solved problems with paid employment, but did not seem to affect unpaid work. Use of medical services remained relatively stable after first-time hearing aid fitting. The Amsterdam Inventory proved to be a useful questionnaire to assess the effects on hearing disability. No effects of hearing aid fitting on generic quality of life could be determined with the EuroQol, while hearing aid fitting did lead to an improvement in one aspect of generic quality of life; namely social functioning.