» Articles » PMID: 20716230

Effectiveness, Safety and Cost of Drug Substitution in Hypertension

Overview
Specialty Pharmacology
Date 2010 Aug 19
PMID 20716230
Citations 18
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Cost-containment measures in healthcare provision include the implementation of therapeutic and generic drug substitution strategies in patients whose condition is already well controlled with pharmacotherapy. Treatment for hypertension is frequently targeted for such measures. However, drug acquisition costs are only part of the cost-effectiveness equation, and a variety of other factors need to be taken into account when assessing the impact of switching antihypertensives. From the clinical perspective, considerations include maintenance of an appropriate medication dose during the switching process; drug equivalence in terms of clinical effectiveness; and safety issues, including the diverse adverse-event profiles of available alternative drugs, differences in the 'inactive' components of drug formulations and the quality of generic formulations. Patients' adherence to and persistence with therapy may be negatively influenced by switching, which will also impact on treatment effectiveness. From the economic perspective, the costs that are likely to be incurred by switching antihypertensives include those for additional clinic visits and laboratory tests, and for hospitalization if required to address problems arising from adverse events or poorly controlled hypertension. Indirect costs and the impact on patients' quality of life also require assessment. Substitution strategies for antihypertensives have not been tested in large outcome trials and there is little available clinical or economic evidence on which to base decisions to switch drugs. Although the cost of treatment should always be considered, careful assessment of the human and economic costs and benefits of antihypertensive drug substitution is required before this practice is recommended.

Citing Articles

A retrospective analysis of e-prescriptions for non-communicable diseases on a telehealth platform in Malaysia.

Yow H, Loo J, Lee Y, Oui H, Megat Mohd Zubairi M, Abdul Rahim N BMC Health Serv Res. 2024; 24(1):897.

PMID: 39107764 PMC: 11304582. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-11341-0.


An exploration of factors influencing the selection of generic and innovator medicines in Saudi Arabia using an observational cross-sectional study.

AlOmeir O, Almuqbil M, Hussam Alsawadi A, Mohamed Genedy A, Fawaz Almutairi A, Talal Alaydaa H Saudi Pharm J. 2024; 32(4):102021.

PMID: 38497088 PMC: 10943484. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsps.2024.102021.


Treatment patterns of long-dose-interval medication for persistent management of osteoporosis in Taiwan.

Lin S, Chen Y, Chen W, Li C, Ku C, Chen C Arch Osteoporos. 2022; 17(1):94.

PMID: 35840845 DOI: 10.1007/s11657-022-01125-6.


Nature and frequency of prescription modifications in community pharmacies: A nationwide study in the Netherlands.

van Loon W, Borgsteede S, Baas G, Kruijtbosch M, Buurma H, De Smet P Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2020; 87(3):1455-1465.

PMID: 32901959 PMC: 9328355. DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14548.


Systematic literature review of the methodology for developing pharmacotherapeutic interchange guidelines and their implementation in hospitals and ambulatory care settings.

Adrover-Rigo M, Fraga-Fuentes M, Puigventos-Latorre F, Martinez-Lopez I Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2018; 75(2):157-170.

PMID: 30341498 DOI: 10.1007/s00228-018-2573-7.


References
1.
Barsky A, Saintfort R, Rogers M, Borus J . Nonspecific medication side effects and the nocebo phenomenon. JAMA. 2002; 287(5):622-7. DOI: 10.1001/jama.287.5.622. View

2.
Pruszydlo M, Quinzler R, Kaltschmidt J, Haefeli W . [Medical problems and risks of switching drugs according to legal requirements of drug discount contracts in Germany]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2008; 133(27):1423-8. DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1081094. View

3.
Thiebaud P, Patel B, Nichol M, Berenbeim D . The effect of switching on compliance and persistence: the case of statin treatment. Am J Manag Care. 2005; 11(11):670-4. View

4.
Kazierad D, Martin D, Blum R, Tenero D, Ilson B, Boike S . Effect of fluconazole on the pharmacokinetics of eprosartan and losartan in healthy male volunteers. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1997; 62(4):417-25. DOI: 10.1016/S0009-9236(97)90120-X. View

5.
Ascione F, Kirking D, Gaither C, Welage L . Historical overview of generic medication policy. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash). 2001; 41(4):567-77. DOI: 10.1016/s1086-5802(16)31281-5. View