The clinical and economic burden of nonadherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy in hypertensive patients

Cost of non-persistence with oral bisphosphonates in post-menopausal osteoporosis treatment in France

BACKGROUND

During the last decade, oral bisphosphonates (BP) became the most widely prescribed pharmacologic class for post-menopausal osteoporosis. However, many surveys revealed the important issue of poor persistence with those drugs resulting in a failure of treatment to reduce fracture risk sufficiently. Using a published Markov model, this study analyses the economic impact of non-persistence with bisphosphonates in the context of the introduction of generics in France.

METHODS

Direct costs of vertebral, hip and wrist fracture were assessed and included in an existing 10-year Markov model developed to analyse consequences of non-persistence. Three alternatives of comparison were set: no treatment, real-world persistence, and ideal persistence. Simulated patients' characteristics matched those from a French observational study and the real-world adherence alternative employed persistence data from published database analysis. The risk of fracture of menopausal women and the risk reduction associated with the drugs were based on results reported in clinical trials. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated first between real-world adherence and no treatment alternatives, and second between ideal and real-world persistence alternatives. The cost of non-persistence was defined as the difference between total cost of ideal and real-world persistence alternatives.

RESULTS

Within fractured women population, mean costs of 10-year management of fracture were significantly different between the three alternatives with €7,239 (± €4,783), €6,711 (± €4,410) and €6,134 (± €3,945) in the no-treatment, the real-world and ideal persistence alternatives, respectively (p < 0.0001). Cost-effectiveness ratio for real-world treatment persistence compared with no-treatment alternative was found dominant and as well, alternative of ideal persistence dominated the former. Each ten percentage point of persistence gain amounted to €58 per patient, and extrapolation resulted in a global annual cost of non-persistence of over €30 million to the French health care system, with a substantial transfer from hospital to pharmacy budgets.

CONCLUSION

Within term, improving persistence with oral bisphosphonates should be economically dominant on levels currently known in real-world. Given this potential savings, ambitious adherence-enhancing interventions should be considered in osteoporotic patients.

Optimizing Statin Treatment Decisions for Diabetes Patients in the Presence of Uncertain Future Adherence

Background. Statins are an important part of the treatment plan for patients with type 2 diabetes. However, patients who are prescribed statins often take less than the prescribed amount or stop taking the drug altogether. This suboptimal adherence may decrease the benefit of statin initiation. Objective. To estimate the influence of adherence on the optimal timing of statin initiation for patients with type 2 diabetes. Method. The authors use a Markov decision process (MDP) model to optimize the treatment decision for patients with type 2 diabetes. Their model incorporates a Markov model linking adherence to treatment effectiveness and long-term health outcomes. They determine the optimal time of statin initiation that minimizes expected costs and maximizes expected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Results. In the long run, approximately 25% of patients remain highly adherent to statins. Based on the MDP model, generic statins lower costs in men and result in a small increase in costs in women relative to no treatment. Patients are able to noticeably increase their expected QALYs by 0.5 to 2 years depending on the level of adherence. Conclusions. Adherence-improving interventions can increase expected QALYs by as much as 1.5 years. Given suboptimal adherence to statins, it is optimal to delay the start time for statins; however, changing the start time alone does not lead to significant changes in costs or QALYs.

Kidney function and long-term medication adherence after myocardial infarction in the elderly

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The association of kidney function with long-term outpatient medication adherence in the elderly remains understudied.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

A cohort of 2103 patients over the age of 65 years enrolled in a pharmacy benefits program after hospital discharge for myocardial infarction was studied. Using linear mixed effects models, the association of baseline kidney function with long-term adherence to recommended medications after myocardial infarction was examined, including angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), β-blockers, and statins. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of days covered as calculated by pharmacy refill data for 12 serial 3-month intervals (totaling 36 months of follow-up).

RESULTS

Overall long-term adherence to ACEIs/ARBs, β-blockers, and statins was poor. The mean percentage of days covered by 36 months was only 50% to 60% for all three medication classes. Patients with baseline kidney dysfunction had significantly lower long-term ACEI/ARB and β-blocker adherence compared with patients with higher baseline kidney function. Long-term statin adherence did not vary by baseline level of kidney function.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term medication adherence after myocardial infarction in the elderly is low, especially in patients with kidney dysfunction. Future strategies to improve medication adherence should pay special attention to the elderly with kidney dysfunction because they may be especially vulnerable to its adverse clinical consequences.

ASH position paper: Adherence and persistence with taking medication to control high blood pressure

Nonadherence and poor or no persistence in taking antihypertensive medications results in uncontrolled high blood pressure, poor clinical outcomes, and preventable health care costs. Factors associated with nonadherence are multilevel and relate not only to the patient, but also to the provider, health care system, health care organization, and community. National guideline committees have called for more aggressive approaches to implement strategies known to improve adherence and technologies known to enable changes at the systems level, including improved communication among providers and patients. Improvements in adherence and persistence are likely to be achieved by supporting patient self-management, a team approach to patient care, technology-supported office practice systems, better methods to measure adherence, and less clinical inertia. Integrating high blood pressure control into health care policies that emphasize and improve prevention and management of chronic illness remains a challenge. Four strategies are proposed: focusing on clinical outcomes; empowering informed, activated patients; developing prepared proactive practice teams; and advocating for health care policy reform. With hypertension remaining the most common reason for office visits, the time is now.

The modeled lifetime cost-effectiveness of published adherence-improving interventions for antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medications

OBJECTIVE

 We sought to compare the cost-effectiveness of different interventions that have been shown to improve adherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy, by combining a burden of nonadherence model framework with literature-based data on adherence-improving interventions.

METHODS

  MEDLINE was reviewed for studies that evaluated ≥1 adherence intervention compared with a control, used an adherence measure other than self-report, and followed patients for ≥6 months. Effectiveness was assessed as Relative Improvement, ratio of adherence with an intervention versus control. Costs, standardized to 12 months and adjusted to 2007 US$, and effectiveness estimates for each intervention were entered into a previously published model designed to measure the burden of nonadherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medications, in a hypertensive population. Outputs included direct medical costs and incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS

 After screening, 23 eligible adherence-improving interventions were identified from 18 studies. Relative Improvement ranged from 1.13 to 3.60. After eliminating more costly/less effective interventions, two remained. Self-monitoring, reminders, and educational materials incurred total health-care costs of $17,520, and compared with no adherence intervention, had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $4984 per QALY gained. Pharmacist/nurse management incurred total health-care costs of $17,896, and versus self-monitoring, reminders, and education had an ICER of $6358 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

 Of published interventions shown to improve adherence, reminders and educational materials, and a pharmacist/nurse management program, appear to be cost-effective and should be considered before other interventions. Understanding relative cost-effectiveness of adherence interventions may guide design and implementation of efficient adherence-improving programs.

Problems of nonadherence in cardiology and proposals to improve outcomes

At least 1 in 7 cardiology patients now reports nonadherence to prescribed medications, potentially leading to negative outcomes across a broad range of cardiovascular diseases. This nonadherence can begin as early as the time of prescription or any time thereafter and occurs for a variety of reasons, including communication difficulties, polypharmacy, and a variety of objective and perceived side-effects. Among elderly, low-income, and disabled patients, drug costs represent a growing source of medication nonadherence and can be markedly reduced through the use of drug assistance programs and low-cost generic medications without sacrificing evidence-based therapy. Depression also contributes strongly to nonadherence and is widely prevalent in cardiovascular populations. Improvements in depression are mirrored by improvements in adherence. A systematic screening to identify the presence of nonadherence and many of its causes can be accomplished with minimal impact on visit length. In conclusion, once specific concerns are recognized, options frequently exist to help patients and providers address many of the most common difficulties.

Simultaneous treatment to attain blood pressure and lipid goals and reduced CV risk burden using amlodipine/atorvastatin single-pill therapy in treated hypertensive participants in a randomized controlled trial

TOGETHER investigated whether targeting multiple cardiovascular (CV) risk factors using single-pill amlodipine/atorvastatin (AML/ATO) and therapeutic lifestyle changes (TLC) results in greater blood pressure (BP)/lipid control and additional reduction in estimated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk compared with blood pressure intervention only using amlodipine (AML) + TLC. TOGETHER was a 6-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial using hypertensive participants with additional CV risk factors without CVD/diabetes. Participants were randomized to either AML/ATO (5 to 10/20 mg) + TLC or AML (5 to 10 mg) + TLC. The primary end point was the difference in proportion of participants attaining both BP (<140/90 mm Hg) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (<100 mg/dL) goals at week 6. At week 6, 67.8% of participants receiving AML/ATO + TLC attained the combined BP/LDL-C goal versus 9.6% with AML + TLC (RD [A–B]: 58.2; 95% CI [48.1 to 68.4] P < 0.001; OR: 19.0; 95% CI 9.1 to 39.6; P < 0.001). Significant reductions from baseline in LDL-C, total cholesterol and triglycerides and estimated 10-year Framingham risk were also observed. Treatment with AML/ATO was well tolerated. In conclusion, a multifactorial CV management approach is more effective in achieving combined BP/LDL-C targets as well as CV risk reduction compared with BP intervention only in this patient population.