The European Journal of Health Economics

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 111–119

An economic evaluation of a perindopril-based blood pressure lowering regimen for patients who have suffered a cerebrovascular event

  • Manouchehr Tavakoli
  • Neil Pumford
  • Mark Woodward
  • Alex Doney
  • John Chalmers
  • Stephen MacMahon
  • Ronald MacWalter
Original paper

Abstract

Objectives

Cerebrovascular disease (or stroke) is one of the main causes of long-term disability and the second leading cause of death worldwide. The economic impact of stroke is clearly seen, as it is the largest single cause of bed occupancy in hospitals in England and accounts for 6% of hospital costs. This analysis is the first to quantify the economic consequences of a blood pressure lowering regimen based on the PROGRESS study (perindopril-based regimen), for reducing future cardiovascular events.

Design

A Markov decision analytical model was used to estimate the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) of blood pressure lowering in the treatment of patients presenting with a cerebrovascular event. The health states are based upon Barthel indices for which resource utilisation and health benefits have previously been estimated.

Setting

The participants for the economic analysis were obtained from the PROGRESS study database. 6,105 clinical study participants were recruited through both primary and secondary care centres.

Participants

The mean age was 64 years; 70% were male in the original study.

Interventions

In the PROGRESS study, blood pressure lowering by a perindopril-based regimen was compared to standard care.

Main outcome measures

Cost per quality adjusted life year for the duration of the study (4 years) and for a time span of 20 years.

Results

Using only direct hospital medical costs, the cost per QALY for a perindopril based regimen is £6,927 for the base study period and £10,133 for a 20-year time period. These results are sensitive to the cost of perindopril, the cost of the stroke unit, length of stay, and to a lesser extent, the cost of indapamide.

Conclusions

This analysis demonstrates a cost-effective treatment for patients suffering a cerebrovascular event with a blood pressure lowering regimen. The findings of this study are in line with current decisions and guidance by the national institute for health and clinical excellence (NICE) in England.

Keywords

Blood pressure lowering Cerebrovascular Markov Cost-effectiveness 

References

  1. 1.
    World Health Organization.: The World Health Report. WHO, Geneva (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Murray, C., Lopez, A.: Mortality by cause for eight regions of to the world: global burden of disease study. Lancet. 349, 1269–1276 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wade D.: Stroke. In: Stevens A., Raftery J. (eds.) Health Care Needs Assessment: The Epidemiologically Based Needs Assessment Reviews. Radcliffe Medical Press, Oxford (1994)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hankey, G., Warlow, C.: Treatment and secondary prevention of stroke: evidence, costs, and effects on individuals and populations. Lancet. 354, 1457–1463 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Department of Health: National Service Framework for Coronary Heart Disease. London (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Office for National Statistics: Mortality Statistics—Causes. London (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yuen, P.: OHE Compendium of Health Statistics. Office of Health Economics, London (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    ISD.: Stroke: Incidence and Mortality (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wolfe, C., Rudd, A., Beech, R.: Stroke Services and Research. An Overview with Recommendations for Future Research. Stroke Association, London (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Office of Health Economics: Stroke. Office of Health Economics (1988)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chalmers, P.: 1999 World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension. Guidelines Subcommittee. Journal of Hypertension. 17(2), 151–183 (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Department of Health: National Service Framework for Older People. London (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rudd, A., Irwin, P., Rutledge, Z., Lowe, D., Wade, D., Morris, R., Pearson, M.: The national sentinel audit of stroke: a tool for raising standards of care. J. R. Coll. Physicians. 30, 460–464 (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guidelines Subcommittee: 1999 World health organization-international society of hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension. J. Hypertens. 17, 151–183 (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chambers, M., Hutton, J., Gladman, J.: Cost-effectiveness analysis of antiplatelet therapy in the prevention of recurrent stroke in the UK: aspirin, dipyridamole and aspirin-dipyridamole. Pharmacoeconomics. 16(5 pt2), 577–593 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Straus, S., Majumdar, S., Findlay, A.: A new evidence from stroke prevention: scientific review. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 288(11), 1388–1395 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Diener, H.C., Cunha, L., Forbes, C., Sivenius, J., Smets, P., Lowenthal, A.: European stroke prevention study, 2: dipyridamole and acetylsalicylic acid in the secondary prevention of stroke. J. Neurol. Sci. 143, 1–13 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Antithrombotic Trialists’ Collaboration: Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients. BMJ. 324, 71–86 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    PROGRESS Management Committee: Blood pressure lowering for the secondary prevention of stroke rationale and design for PROGRESS. J. Hypertens. 14(Suppl 2), S41–S46 (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    MacMahon, S., Peto, R., Cutler, J., Collins, R., Sorlie, P., Neaton, J., Abbott, R., Godwin, J., Dyer, A., Stamler, J.: Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 1, prolonged differences in blood pressure: prospective observational studies corrected for the regression dilution bias. Lancet. 335, 765–774 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Asia Pacific Cohort Studies Collaboration: Blood pressure and cardiovascular diseases in the Asia-Pacific region. J. Hypertens. 21, 707–716 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    PROGRESS Collaborative Group: Randomised trial of a perindopril-based blood-pressure-lowering regimen among 6,105 individuals with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Lancet. 358(9287), 1033–1041 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) Study Investigators: Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy. Lancet. 355, 253–259 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists’ Collaboration: Effects of ACE inhibitors, calcium antagonists, and other blood-pressure-lowering drugs: results of prospectively designed overviews of randomised trials. Lancet. 356, 1955–1964 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    PROGRESS Collaborative Group: Effects of a perindopril-based blood pressure lowering regimen on cardiac outcomes among patients with cerebrovascular disease. Eur. Heart. J. 24, 475–484 (2003)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sonnenberg, F.A., Beck, R.J.: Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med. Decis. Mak. 13(4), 322–338 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Beck, R.J., Pauker, S.G.: The Markov process in medical prognosis. Med Decis. Mak. 3(4), 419–458 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nordmann, A.J., Krahn, M., Logan, A.G., Naglie, G., Detsky, A.S.: The cost effectiveness of ACE inhibitors as first-line antihypertensive therapy. Pharmacoeconomics. 21(8), 573–585 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Eisenstein, E.L., Peterson, E.D., Jollis, J.G., Tardiff, B.E., Califf, R.M., Knight, J.D., Mark, D.B.: Evaluating the potential ‘economic attractiveness’ of new therapies in patients with Non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. Pharmacoeconomics. 17(3), 263–272 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kuntz, K., Weinstein, M.: Modelling in economic evaluation. In: Drummond, M., McGuire, A. (eds.) Economic Evaluation in Health Care: Merging Theory with Practice. pp. 141–171. OUP, Oxford (2001)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Collin, C., Wade, D., Davies, S., Horne, V.: The Barthel ADL index: a reliability study. Int. Disabil. Stud. 10(2), 61–63 (1988)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Caro, J.J., Huybrechts, K.F., Kelley, H.E.: Predicting treatment costs after acute ischemic stroke on the basis of patient characteristics at presentation and early dysfunction. Stroke. 32, 100–106 (2001)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wolstenholme, J.L., Fenn, P., Gray, A.M., Keene, J., Jacoby, R., Hope, T.: Estimating the relationship between disease progression and cost of care in dementia. Br. J. Psychiatry. 181, 36–42 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chapman, N., Huxley, R., Andersion, C., Bousser, M.G., Chalmers, J., Colman, S., Davis, S., Donnan, G., MacMahon, S., Neal, B., Warlow, C., Woodward, M.: Effects of perindopril-based blood pressure lowering regimen on the risk of recurrent stroke according to stroke subtype and medical history: the PROGRESS trial. Stroke. 35, 116–121 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Johnson, D.: Triangular approximations for continuous random variables in risk analysis. J Oper Res Soc. 53, 457–467 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hardie, K., Jamrozik, K., Hankey, G.J., Broadhurst, R.J., Anderson, C.: Trends in five-year survival and risk of recurrent stroke after first-ever stroke in the Perth Community Stroke Study. Cerebrovasc. Dis. 19, 179–185 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Terént, A.: Cerebrovascular mortality 10 years after stroke a population-based study. Stroke. 35, e343–e345 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hardie, K., Hankey, G.J., Jamrozik, K., Broadhurst, R.J., Anderson, C.: Ten-year survival after first-ever stroke in the Perth Community Stroke Study. Stroke. 34, 1842–1846 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Brønnum-Hansen, H., Davidsen, M., Thorvaldsen, P.: Long-term survival and causes of death after stroke. Stroke. 32, 2131–2136 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Marini, C., Totaro, R., Carolei, A.: Long-term prognosis of cerebral ischemia in young adults. Stroke. 30, 2320–2325 (1999)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    MacWalter, R., Coid, D., Fraser, H., Ersoy, Y.: The Dundee Stroke Register: experience of the first ten years. Scott. Med. J. 44(4), 103–105 (1999)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Office for National Statistics: Mortality statistics general review of the registrar general on deaths in England and Wales, 2002 Series DH1 no.35. London. 72, Table 8 (2004)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Simoens, S.: Using the Delphi technique in economic evaluation: time to revisit the oracle?. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 31(6), 519–522 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Scottish Health Statistics: Scottish health service costs NHS national services Scotland, (2004)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    British National Formulary: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, No. 50, (2005)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Jørgensen, H.S., Nakayama, H., Raaschou, H.O., Olsen, T.S.: Acute stroke care and rehabilitation: an analysis of the direct cost and its clinical and social determinants: the Copenhagen stroke study. Stroke. 28, 1138–1141 (1997)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Briggs, A.H.: Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics. 17(5), 479–500 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Johnson, D.: The triangular distribution as a proxy for the beta distribution in risk analysis. Statistician. 46(3), 387–398 (1997)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    National Institute for Clinical Excellence: Guide to the methods of technology appraisal April 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Social value judgement—principles for the development of NICE guidance, December (2005). http://www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o=283494
  51. 51.
    Jonsson, B., Johannesson, M., Kjekshus, J., Olsson, A., Pedersen, T., Wedel, H.: Cost-effectiveness of cholesterol lowering. Results from the scandinavian simvastatin survival study (4S). Eur. Heart. J. 17, 1001–1007 (1996)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Youman, P., Wilson, K., Harraf, F., Kalra, L.: The economic burden of stroke in the United Kingdom. Pharmacoeconomics. 21(Suppl 1), 43–50 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    PROGRESS Collaborative Group. perindopril-based blood pressure lowering in individuals with cerebrovascular disease: Consistency of benefits by age, sex and geographic region. J. Hypertens. 22, 653–659 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manouchehr Tavakoli
    • 1
  • Neil Pumford
    • 2
  • Mark Woodward
    • 3
  • Alex Doney
    • 4
  • John Chalmers
    • 5
  • Stephen MacMahon
    • 5
  • Ronald MacWalter
    • 4
  1. 1.School of ManagementUniversity of St AndrewsSt AndrewsUK
  2. 2.Nurseplus LtdAuchterarderUK
  3. 3.Mount Sinai Medical SchoolNew YorkUSA
  4. 4.Ninewells Hospital and Medical SchoolDundeeUK
  5. 5.The George InstituteUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations