Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
Cost-effectiveness analyses merit inclusion in antihypertensive research; leaves open effects on left ventricular preservation in practice.
A pharmacoeconomic primer reviews current economic models used to analyze and synthesize information that may be considered in certain health-related policies or clinical decisions. Heightened budgetary pressures concomitant with mandates for demonstrable increases in efficacy and safety have fostered greater use of cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) throughout the health care industry. In the field of hypertension, major clinical trials of pharmacotherapeutic regimens generally demonstrated benefit of reducing blood pressure; CEAs supplied additional data concerning the optimum selection among alternative antihypertensive therapies. As interest has focused on the preservation of left ventricular (LV) function for the best prognosis, it has become increasingly evident that not all antihypertensive regimens affect LV function in the same way. Thus CEA may be an appropriate method to evaluate these effects and facilitate the identification of a regimen that minimizes deterioration of LV function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arnold et al. (1994) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: