Why the study?
Does adding valsartan to usual care reduce costs in heart failure patients not receiving ACEIs?
Does adding valsartan to usual care reduce costs in heart failure patients not receiving ACEIs?
Adding valsartan to usual care for heart failure patients not on ACEIs is projected to yield substantial net cost savings for US health plans primarily through averted hospitalizations.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support net savings via reduced HF hospitalizations; leaves open prospective confirmation in real-world US settings.
SummaryResults from a large, randomised clinical trial demonstrated reduced rates of hospitalisation and mortality, and reduced length of stay associated with valsartan added to the usual care of heart failure patients not currently receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs). These results were used in a budget impact model for a large US health plan. Administrative claims data were used to estimate cost savings over 1 year. In the study health plan, 63,218 patients were identified with heart failure, with 55% not currently receiving ACEI or valsartan. Using health plan-specific cost data, care for the untreated heart failure patients with valsartan would reduce hospitalisation costs from $135 million to $43 million owing to averted heart failure-related hospitalisations and shortened length of stay for the remaining hospitalisations. Economic effects of other aspects of treatment with valsartan (e.g. outpatient or physician visits or adverse events) were not considered. Taking into account only hospitalisations and the costs of valsartan therapy, net savings in the study health plan would be expected to be $64 million.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Smith et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: