Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Improving Adherence to Treatment and Reducing Economic Costs of Hypertension: The Role of Olmesartan-Based Treatment

  • Review Article
  • Published:
High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Poor adherence to antihypertensive treatment is the single most important factor of unsatisfactory blood pressure (BP) control. This review focuses on therapy-related factors affecting adherence and suggests how to improve it with a wise choice of treatment schedule. Complex drug treatment schemes, poor tolerability and drug substitutions are frequent causes of poor adherence which, in turn, causes insufficient BP control, greater incidence of cardiovascular events and, finally, higher global health costs. The effects of prescribing generic drugs and of drug substitutions on adherence is also discussed. In terms of adherence, generic drugs do not seem to be better than branded drugs, unless patients have to bear very high “out of pocket” expenses to buy original drugs, suggesting no advantages in switching drug with the mere goal of reducing the cost of therapy. An important role in improving adherence (and thus cardiovascular events and health expenditure) is also played by the availability of fixed-dose combinations; among antihypertensive drugs, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are those associated with higher levels of adherence and persistence. Among ARBs, olmesartan stands out for a wide choice of effective fixed-dose combinations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

From [24]

Fig. 2

From [25]

Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yiannakopoulou EC, Papadopulos JS, Cokkinos DV, Mountokalakis TD. Adherence to antihypertensive treatment: a critical factor for blood pressure control. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2005;12:243–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sabatè E. Adherence to long-term therapies: evidence for action. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brown MT, Bussell JK. Medication adherence: WHO cares? Mayo Clin Proc. 2011;86(4):304–14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Shaw E, Anderson J, Maloney M, Jay S, Fagan D. Factors associated with noncompliance of patients taking antihypertensive medications. Hosp Pharm. 1995;30:201–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Costa FV. Compliance with antihypertensive treatment. Clin Exp Hypertens. 1996;18(3–4):463–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Berg JS, Dischler J, Wagner DJ, Raia JJ, Palmer-Shevlin N. Medication compliance: a healthcare problem. Ann Pharmacother. 1993;27(9 Suppl):S1–24.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. DiMatteo MR, Giordani PJ, Lepper HS, Croghan TW. Patient adherence and medical treatment outcomes: a meta-analysis. Med Care. 2002;40:794–811.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bloom BS. Continuation of initial antihypertensive medication after 1 year of therapy. Clin Ther. 1998;20:1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Corrao G, Zambon A, Parodi A, Poluzzi E, Baldi I, Merlino L, Cesana G, Mancia G. Discontinuation of and changes in drug therapy for hypertension among newly-treated patients: a population-based study in Italy. J Hypertens. 2008;26:819–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mazzaglia G, Mantovani LG, Sturkenboom MC, Filippi A, Trifirò G, Cricelli C, Brignoli O, Caputi AP. Patterns of persistence with antihypertensive medications in newly diagnosed hypertensive patients in Italy: a retrospective cohort study in primary care. J Hypertens. 2005;23(11):2093–100.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Costa FV, Degli Esposti L, Cerra C, Veronesi C, Buda S. Trends in prescription and determinants of persistence to antihypertensive therapy: The PAPEETE study. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2009;16(4):167–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cherry SB, Benner JS, Hussein MA, Tang SSK, Nichol MB. The clinical and economic burden of non adherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy in hypertensive patients. Value Health. 2009;12(4):489–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Degli Esposti L, Valpiani G. Pharmacoeconomic burden of undertreating hypertension. Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(14):907–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Degli Esposti L, Saragoni S, Benemei S, Batacchi P, Geppetti P, Di Bari M. Adherence to antihypertensive medications and health outcomes among newly treated hypertensive patients. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;3:47–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rasmussen JN, Chong A, Alter DA. Relationship between adherence to evidence-based pharmacotherapy and long-term mortality after acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2007;297:177–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Breekveldt-Postma NS, Penning-van Beest FJ, Siiskonen SJ, Koerselman J, Klungel OH, Falvey H, Vincze G, Herings RM. The effect of discontinuation of antihypertensives on the risk of acute myocardial infarction and stroke. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;24:121–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mazzaglia G, Ambrosioni E, Alacqua M, Filippi A, Sessa E, Immordino V, Borghi C, Brignoli O, Caputi AP, Cricelli C, Mantovani LG. Adherence to antihypertensive medications and cardiovascular morbidity among newly diagnosed hypertensive patients. Circulation. 2009;120:1598–605.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sokol MC, McGuigan KA, Verbrugge RR, Epstein RS. Impact of medication adherence on hospitalization risk and healthcare cost. Med Care. 2005;43:521–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Muszbek N, Brixner D, Benedict A, Keskinaslan A, Khan ZM. The economic consequences of noncompliance in cardiovascular disease and related conditions: a literature review. Int J Clin Pract. 2008;62(2):338–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Dragomir A, Côté R, Roy L, Blais L, Lalonde L, Bérard A, Perreault S. Impact of adherence to antihypertensive agents on clinical outcomes and hospitalization costs. Med Care. 2010;48(5):418–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mennini FS, Marcellusi A, von der Schulenburg JM, Gray A, Levy P, Sciattella P, Soro M, Staffiero G, Zeidler J, Maggioni A, Schmieder RE. Cost of poor adherence to anti-hypertensive therapy in five European countries. Eur J Health Econ. 2015;16(1):65–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Allender S, Scarborough P, Peto V, Rayner M, Leal J, Luengo-Fernandez R, Gray A. European cardiovascular disease statistics. Brussels: European Heart Network; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hansson L, Lloyd A, Anderson P, Kopp A. Excess morbidity and cost of failure to achieve targets for blood pressure control in Europe. Blood Press. 2002;11(1):35–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Roebuck MC, Liberman JN, Gemmill-Toyama MA, Brennan TA. Medication adherence leads to lower health care use and costs despite increased drug spending. Health Aff. 2011;30(1):91–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pittman DG, Tao Z, Chen W, Stettin GD. Antihypertensive medication adherence and subsequent healthcare utilization and costs. Am J Manag Care. 2010;16(8):568–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Andersen ML, Laursen K, Schaumann M, Rubak SL, Olesgaard P, Mainz J, Lauritzen T. How do patients evaluate the newly introduced system of substituting prescriptions? Ugeskr Læger. 2000;162(45):6066–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hakonsen H, Eilertsen M, Borge H, Toverud EL. Generic substitution: additional challenge for adherence in hypertensive patients? Curr Med Res Opin. 2009;25(10):2515–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Van Wijk BL, Klungel OH, Heerdink ER, de BA. Generic substitution of antihypertensive drugs: does it affect adherence? Ann Pharmacother. 2006;40(1):15–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Eaddy MT, Cook CL, O’Day K, Burch SP, Cantrell CR. How patient cost-sharing trends affect adherence and outcomes a literature review. P&T®. 2012;37(1):45–55.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Briesacher BA, Andrade SE, Fouayzi H, Chan KA. Medication adherence and use of generic drug therapies. Am J Manag Care. 2009;15:450–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Shrank WH, Hoang T, Ettner SL, Glassman PA, Nair K, DeLapp D, Dirstine J, Avorn J, Asch SM. The implications of choice: prescribing generic or preferred pharmaceuticals improves medication adherence for chronic conditions. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:332–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Taira DA, Wong KS, Frech-Tamas F, Chung RS. Copayment level and compliance with antihypertensive medication: analysis and policy implications for managed care. Am J Manag Care. 2006;12:678–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sedjo RL, Cox ER. Lowering copayments: impact of simvastatin patent expiration on patient adherence. Am J Manag Care. 2008;14:813–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Després F, Forget A, Kettani FZ, Blais L. Impact of patient reimbursement timing and patient out-of-pocket expenses on medication adherence in patients covered by private drug insurance plans. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2016;22(5):539–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Briesacher BA, Andrade SE, Fouayzi H, Chan KA. Medication adherence and the use of generic drug therapies. Am J Manag Care. 2009;15(7):450–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Corrao G, Soranna D, La Vecchia C, Catapano A, Agabiti-Rosei E, Gensini G, Merlino L, Mancia G. Medication persistence and the use of generic and brand-name blood pressure-lowering agents. J Hypertens. 2014;32(5):1146–53. doi:10.1097/HJH.0000000000000130.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Colombo GL, Agabiti-Rosei E, Margonato A, Mencacci C, Montecucco CM, Trevisan R. Off-patent generic medicines vs. off-patent brand medicines for six reference drugs: a retrospective claims data study from five local healthcare units in the lombardy region of Italy. PLoS One. 2013;8(12):e82990. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0082990.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Weissenfeld J, Stock S, Lüngen M, Gerber A. The nocebo effect: a reason for patients’ non-adherence to generic substitution? Pharmazie. 2010;65:451–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Faasse K, Petrie KJ. The nocebo effect: patient expectations and medication side effects. Postgrad Med J. 2013;89(1055):540–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kesselheim AS, Bykov K, Avorn J, Tong A, Doherty M, Choudhry NK. Burden of changes in pill appearance for patients receiving generic cardiovascular medications after myocardial infarction: cohort and nested case-control studies. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161(2):96–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Golightly LK, Smolinske SS, Bennett ML, Sutherland EW, Rumack BH. Pharmaceutical excipients. Adverse effects associated with inactive ingredients in drug products (part I). Med Toxicol Adverse Drug Exp. 1988;3(2):128–65.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Strauss J. Excipient-related adverse drug reactions a clinical approach. Curr Allergy Clin Immunol. 2015;28(1):24–7.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Stafylas AJP, Stergiou GS. Effectiveness, safety and cost of drug substitution in hypertension. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;70(3):320–34.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Harris Interactive. Consumers’ views on therapeutic substitution. http://www.nclnet.org/health/therapeutic_substitution.pdf (2008). Accessed 15 June 2009.

  45. Yim DS. Simulation of the AUC changes after generic substitution in patients. J Korean Med Sci. 2009;24(1):7–12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Colombo GL, Agabiti-Rosei E, Margonato A, Mencacci C, Montecucco CM, Trevisan R, Catapano AL. Impact of substitution among generic drugs on persistence and adherence: a retrospective claims data study from 2 Local Healthcare Units in the Lombardy Region of Italy. Atheroscler Suppl. 2016;21:1–8. doi:10.1016/j.atherosclerosissup.2016.02.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Thayer S, Dastani H. Can switching among the ARB class impact medical costs and medication adherence? J Manag Care Pharm. 2009;15:179.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Wilson J, Axelsen K, Tang S. Medicaid prescription drug access restrictions: exploring the effect on patient persistence with hypertension medications. Am J Manag Care. 2005;11:SP27–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Degli Esposti L, Sangiorgi D, Buda S, Degli Esposti E, Scaglione F. Therapy discontinuation or substitution in patients with cardiovascular disease, switching among different products of the same off-patent active substance: a ‘real-world’ retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e012003.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Paveliu MS, Bengea S, Paveliu FS. Generic substitution issues: brand-generic substitution, generic-generic substitution, and generic Substitution of Narrow Therapeutic Index (NTI)/critical dose drugs. J Clin Med. 2011;6(1):52–8.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Bloom BS. Daily regimen and compliance with treatment. BMJ. 2001;323:647.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Eisen SA, Miller DK, Woodward RS, Spitznagel E, Przybeck TR. The effect of prescribed daily dose frequency on patient medication compliance. Arch Intern Med. 1990;150(9):1881–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Xie L, Frech-Tamas F, Marrett E, Baser O. A medication adherence and persistence comparison of hypertensive patients treated with single-, double- and triple-pill combination therapy. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014;30(12):2415–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Khan MU, Shah S, Hameed T. Barriers to and determinants of medication adherence among hypertensive patients attended National Health Service Hospital, Sunderland. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2014;6(2):104–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Svensson S. Medication adherence, side effects and patient-physician interaction in hypertension. Thèse de Doctorat en Médecine. Suède: Université de Goteborg. 2006, 65f.

  56. Vrijens B, Vincze G, Kristanto P, Urquhart J, Burnier M. Adherence to prescribed antihypertensive drug treatments: longitudinal study of electronically compiled dosing histories. BMJ. 2008;336(7653):1114–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Kario K. Morning surge in blood pressure and cardiovascular risk. Evidence and perspectives. Hypertension. 2010;56:765–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Costa FV, D’Ausilio A, Bianchi C, Negrini C, Lopatriello S. Adherence to antihypertensive medications a review and update. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2009;16:101.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Conlin PR, Gerth WC, Fox J, Roehm JB, Boccuzzi SJ. Four-year persistence patterns among patients initiating therapy with the angiotensin II receptor antagonist losartan versus other artihypertensive drug classes. Clin Ther. 2001;23(12):1999–2010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Kronish IM, Woodward M, Sergie Z, Ogedegbe G, Falzon L, Mann DM. Meta-analysis: impact of drug class on adherence to antihypertensives. Circulation. 2011;123(15):1611–21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Mazzaglia G, Mantovani LG, Sturkenboom MC, Filippi A, Trifirò G, Cricelli C, Brignoli O, Caputi AP. Patterns of persistence with antihypertensive medications in newly diagnosed hypertensive patients in Italy: a retrospective cohort study in primary care. J Hypertens. 2005;23(11):2093–100.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Redon J, Fabia MJ. Efficacy in angiotensin receptor blockade: a comparative review of data with olmesartan. J Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone Syst. 2009;10(3):147–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Saseen JJ. Review of olmesartan medoxomil in achieving guideline-recommended target BP goals and implications for managed care. Curr Hypertens Rev. 2012;8:190–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Kourlaba G, Gialama F, Tsioufis K, Maniadakis N. A literature review to evaluate the clinical and economic value of olmesartan for the treatment of hypertensive patients. Int J Cardiol. 2016;221:60–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Brunner HR. Clinical efficacy and tolerability of olmesartan. Clin Ther. 2004;26(Supplement A):A28–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Sherrill B, Halpern M, Khan S, Zhang J, Panjabi S. Single-pill vs free-equivalent combination therapies for hypertension: a meta-analysis of health care costs and adherence. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2011;13(12):898–909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Gupta AK, Arshad S, Poulter NR. Compliance, safety, and effectiveness of fixed-dose combinations of antihypertensive agents: a meta-analysis. Hypertension. 2010;55(2):399–407.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Gradman AH, Parisé H, Lefebvre P, Falvey H, Lafeuille MH, Duh MS. Initial combination therapy reduces the risk of cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients: a matched cohort study. Hypertension. 2013;61(2):309–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Dickson M, Plauschinat CA. Compliance with antihypertensive therapy in the elderly: a comparison of fixed-dose combination amlodipine/benazepril versus component-based free-combination therapy. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2008;8(1):45–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Tung YC, Lin YS, Wu LS, Chang CJ, Chu PH. Clinical outcomes and healthcare costs in hypertensive patients treated with a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine/valsartan. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2015;17(1):51–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Yang W, Chang J, Kahler KH, Fellers T, Orloff J, Wu EQ, Bensimon AG. Evaluation of compliance and health care utilization in patients treated with single pill vs. free combination antihypertensives. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(9):2065–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Baser O, Andrews LM, Wang L, Xie L. Comparison of real-world adherence, healthcare resource utilization and costs for newly initiated valsartan/amlodipine single-pill combination versus angiotensin receptor blocker/calcium channel blocker free-combination therapy. J Med Econ. 2011;14(5):576–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Kumagai N, Onishi K, Hoshino K, Nakamori S, Kitai T, Yazu T, Oota M, Ueda Y, Hiraoka N, Okamoto S, Yamada T, Dohi K, Nakamura M, Ito M. Improving drug adherence using fixed combinations caused beneficial treatment outcomes and decreased health-care costs in patients with hypertension. Clin Exp Hypertens. 2013;35(5):55–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Volpe M, de la Sierra A, Kreutz R, Laurent S, Manolis AJ. ARB-based single-pill platform to guide a practical therapeutic approach to hypertensive patients. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2014;21:137.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. McIntyre H, Costa FV, Düsing R, Ambrosioni E, Gerth W. The role of losartan in cost-effective hypertension control. Curr Med Res Opin. 2002;18(3):139–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Theodoratou D, Maniadakis N, Fragoulakis V, Stamouli E. Analysis of published economic evaluations of angiotensin receptor blockers. Hell J Cardiol. 2009;50:105–18.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Boersma C, Voors AA, Visser ST, de Jong-van den Berg LT, Postma MJ. Cost effectiveness of angiotensin receptor blocker monotherapy in patients with hypertension in the Netherlands: a comparative analysis using clinical trial and drug utilization data. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2010;10(1):49–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Miller LA, Wade R, Dai D, Cziraky MJ, Ramaswamy K, Panjabi S. Economic evaluation of four angiotensin II receptor blockers in the treatment of hypertension. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(6):1307–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Oparil S, Williams D, Chrysant SG, Marbury TC, Neutel J. Comparative efficacy of olmesartan, losartan, valsartan and irbesartan in the control of essential hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2001;3(283–91):318.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Simons WR. Comparative cost effectiveness of angiotensin II receptor blockers in a US managed care setting: olmesartan medoxomil compared with losartan, valsartan and irbesartan. Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21:61–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Belsey JD. Choice of angiotensin receptor blocker in moderate hypertension A UK-based cost–benefit comparison of olmesartan- and candesartan-based regimens. J Med Econ. 2011;14:5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Kobayashi SM, Matsushita Y, Mori A, Kawasugi K, Saruta T. Cost-utility analysis of antihypertensive combination therapy in Japan by a Monte Carlo simulation model. Hypertens. Res. 2008;31:1373–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Madre Fortunata Toniolo Hospital, Via Toscana, 31, 40141, Bologna, Italy

    Francesco Vittorio Costa

Authors
  1. Francesco Vittorio Costa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesco Vittorio Costa.

Ethics declarations

Funding

Expert review of the manuscript has been founded by Menarini International Operations Luxembourg S.A. (MIOL).

Conflict of interest

FVC has lectured in symposia supported Menarini, Bayer, Guidotti, Servier.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain data derived by any current studies with human participants performed by the author. The clinical studies mentioned were provided with specific ethical approval.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Costa, F.V. Improving Adherence to Treatment and Reducing Economic Costs of Hypertension: The Role of Olmesartan-Based Treatment. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev 24, 265–274 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40292-017-0221-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40292-017-0221-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation