Key result
Universal hypertension screening and treatment gains QALYs but fails to meet cost-effectiveness thresholds.
Why the study?
The cost-utility of expanding hypertension screening, diagnosis, and treatment among adults covered by Peru's Seguro Integral de Salud was assessed to inform health policy decisions.
Does expanded hypertension screening and treatment improve cost-utility compared to usual care among adults covered by Peru's Seguro Integral de Salud?
Does expanded hypertension screening and treatment improve cost-utility compared to usual care among adults covered by Peru's Seguro Integral de Salud?
Effect estimate: ICER of S/ 151,686/QALY
Expanded hypertension screening and treatment strategies in Peru exceeded the standard cost-effectiveness threshold, though risk-targeted screening was more cost-effective than universal expansion.
BACKGROUND: We assessed the cost-utility of expanding hypertension screening, diagnosis, and treatment among adults covered by Peru's Seguro Integral de Salud (SIS). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Analyses assembled in May 2026 used a 10-year cohort Markov model parameterized with the 2024 Peruvian Demographic and Family Health Survey (ENDES), SIS administrative data for 2022-2024, and published parameters. Universal and risk-targeted scenarios were compared with population-specific usual care, using S/ 25,007 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: The baseline sample included 6,098 adults aged 40-74 years; hypertension prevalence was 28.9%. Universal 80-80-80 expansion averted 60.7 cardiovascular events and 6.1 cardiovascular deaths and gained 51.3 QALYs per 100,000 eligible adults. Incremental cost was S/ 7,784,979, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of S/ 151,686/QALY. The scenario targeting 10-year cardiovascular risk ≥ 10% had an ICER of S/ 60,171/QALY in its eligible subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: All scenarios exceeded the threshold. Lower targeted-scenario ICERs concern different eligible populations. Estimates depend on modeled effects, the 10-year horizon, and exclusion of event-related savings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vera-Ponce et al. (2026) studied Hypertension (n=6,098). Universal 80-80-80 expansion of hypertension screening, diagnosis, and treatment vs. Population-specific usual care was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) (ICER of S/ 151,686/QALY). Universal expansion of hypertension screening and treatment gained 51.3 QALYs per 100,000 adults but exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold with an ICER of S/ 151,686/QALY.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: