Cost-effectiveness analysis of imidapril compared to metoprolol in the treatment of stage 1 essential hypertension among Filipino patients seen at the Philippine General Hospital / He Wentian [two others]

Contributor(s): Subject(s): Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of imidapril versus metoprolol as monotherapy in Filipino patients with Stage 1 essential hypertension. STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the health care payer. METHOD: Medical records of 94 out-patients aged 40-70 years old, with Stage 1 essential hypertension and follow-up treatment of 3 months at the Philippine General Hospital were reviewed. Effectiveness of each drug was based on: 1) percentage of patients achieving target blood pressure (< 140 / 90 mmHg); and 2) mean reduction of systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Cost-effectiveness of each drug was evaluated using the criteria of cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: The mean cost of treatment with metoprolol was significantly lower than imidapril. However, treatment with imidapril resulted in a statistically significantly better blood pressure control compared to metoprolol; 77 percent of those given imidapril achieved the target BP vs 56 percent for metoprolol (p=0.03). CER and the ICER showed that 3-months treatment with metoprolol is more cost-effective than the use of imidapril. CONCLUSION: Use of metoprolol over a 3-month period is more cost-effective than imidapril in the treatment of Filipino patients with Stage 1 essential hypertension.
Hello from Record Display Customizations!
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Cover image Item type Current library Home library Collection Shelving location Call number Materials specified Vol info URL Copy number Status Notes Date due Barcode Item holds Item hold queue priority Course reserves
Journal Article DOH Central Library Electronic Resource Section J000020 (Browse shelf) Available D0001J000020

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of imidapril versus metoprolol as monotherapy in Filipino patients with Stage 1 essential hypertension.


STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the health care payer.


METHOD: Medical records of 94 out-patients aged 40-70 years old, with Stage 1 essential hypertension and follow-up treatment of 3 months at the Philippine General Hospital were reviewed. Effectiveness of each drug was based on: 1) percentage of patients achieving target blood pressure (< 140 / 90 mmHg); and 2) mean reduction of systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Cost-effectiveness of each drug was evaluated using the criteria of cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).


RESULTS: The mean cost of treatment with metoprolol was significantly lower than imidapril. However, treatment with imidapril resulted in a statistically significantly better blood pressure control compared to metoprolol; 77 percent of those given imidapril achieved the target BP vs 56 percent for metoprolol (p=0.03). CER and the ICER showed that 3-months treatment with metoprolol is more cost-effective than the use of imidapril.


CONCLUSION: Use of metoprolol over a 3-month period is more cost-effective than imidapril in the treatment of Filipino patients with Stage 1 essential hypertension.

In: Acta Medica Philippina, 2006 vol. 40 (1) pages: 29-36

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.