, Volume 20, Issue 14, pp 963–977

Pharmacoeconomic Considerations in Assessing and Selecting Congestive Heart Failure Therapies

Review Article


Over the last two decades the incidence of congestive heart failure (CHF) has increased with aging of the population and in spite of the decline in age-adjusted mortality rates due to coronary heart disease. Its management has seen substantial progress, embodied in the introduction of ACE inhibitors, initially as part of triple therapy in which they complemented diuretics and digoxin, and latterly as first-line therapy. The current consensus on treatment of CHF has been based on the multiple clinical studies performed with ACE inhibitors in which these agents have been shown to prevent a new cardiovascular accident and/or progression to more severe CHF in an increasingly wide range of patients with symptomatic CHF or post-infarction left ventricular dysfunction (ejection fraction ≤ 40% in some trials or ≤ 35% in others). Not only have the results shown a marked decrease in all-cause (and especially cardiovascular) mortality, but also a great number of cost-effectiveness analyses have shown the advantages of ACE inhibitors in terms of resource allocation: they are either cost saving or convincingly cost effective compared with standard treatment with digoxin and diuretics.

Other drugs require similar cost and clinical analyses before they can earn their place in an add-on strategy. To date, cost savings have been documented only for β-blockers; implantable devices are still undergoing assessment. Two trends are now competing: one is to downplay add-on strategies and to recommend first-line therapy with ACE inhibitors and β-blockers at effective doses, supplemented by a raft of non-pharmaceutical measures (specialist nurses, patient education, dietary advice, exercise) in a multidisciplinary approach to CHF; the second is, on the contrary, to prescribe up to five drugs for patients with advanced CHF. The evidence that this decreases hospital admission rates and patient cost is more than anecdotal, but conclusive proof of cost effectiveness is still lacking and the approach presupposes dedicated structures.

This review argues that despite technical limitations, a combined approach of CHF therapy based on clinical trials and cost-effectiveness analyses is essential. However, improvements can be made. The absence of sufficient comparative data still makes it difficult to choose between drugs within the same class; institutional purchasers need to conduct such analyses to identify the drugs best suited to their patients’ profiles and budgetary constraints.


  1. 1.
    Delahaye F, de Gevigney G, Gaillard S, et al. Epidémiologie et impact économique de l’insuffisance cardiaque en France. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 1998; 91: 1307–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andrews R, Cowley AJ. Clinical and economic factors in the treatment of congestive heart failure. Pharmacoeconomics 1995; 7 (2): 119–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Launois R, Launois B, Reboul-Marty J, et al. Le coût de la sévérité de la maladie: le cas de l’insuffisance cardiaque. Journal d’Economie Médicale 1990; 8 (7–8): 395–412Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McMurray JJ, Hart W, Rhodes G. An evaluation of the cost of heart failure to the National Health Service in the UK. Br J Med 1993; 6: 99–110Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davey PG, Clarkson PB, Mc Mahon A, et al. Costs associated with symptomatic systolic heart failure. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 16 (4): 399–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Levy P, Dubois-Randé JL, Cohen-Solal A, et al. L’apport du carvedilol dans le traitement de l’insuffisance cardiaque: une étude coût-efficacité appliqué au cas de la France. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 2001; 94 (2): 166–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McMurray J, Davie A. The pharmacoeconomics of ACE inhibitors in chronic heart failure. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 9 (3): 188–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Levy E. From cost of illness to cost-effectiveness in heart failure. Eur Heart J 1998; 19 Suppl. P: 2–4Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kupersmith J, Holmes-Rovner M, Hogan A, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis in heart disease, Part III: Ischemia, congestive heart failure, and arrhythmias. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1995; 37 (5): 307–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Galbraith A, Wright-Smith G. Heart failure. New treatment options. Aust Fam Physician 1996; 25 (7): 1035,1038–43Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Parmley WW. Cost-effective management of heart failure. Clin Cardiol 1996; 19 (3): 240–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Willens HJ, Chakko S, Simmons J, et al. Cost-effectiveness in clinical cardiology. Part 1: coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure. Chest 1996; 109 (5): 1359–69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pepine CJ. Adjunctive therapies for acute myocardial infarction became a little clearer in 1993. J Myocardial Ischemia 1994; 6 (1): 6–7Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cleland JG. ACE inhibitors: current understanding and future directions. Br Heart J 1994; 72 (3 Suppl.): S1PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Desnos M. Heart failure management: a challenge for the 3rd millennium [editorial]. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 1998; 91 (11): 1303PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rich MW. Multidisciplinary interventions for the management of heart failure: where do we stand? [editorial; comment]. Am Heart J 1999; 138 (4 Pt 1): 599–601PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ward RE, Gheorghiade M, Young JB, et al. Economic outcomes of withdrawal of digoxin therapy in adult patients with stable congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 26 (1): 93–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cleland JG. Health economic consequences of the pharmacological treatment of heart failure. Eur Heart J 1998; 19 Suppl. P: 32–9Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rich MW, Nease RF. Cost-effectiveness analysis in clinical practice: the case of heart failure. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159 (15): 1690–700PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heaton AH, Bryant J, Berman BN, et al. A pharmacoeconomic comparison of loop diuretics in the treatment of congestive heart failure. Am J Manag Care 1996; 2: 1428–34Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pitt B, Zannad F, Remme WJ, et al. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure. Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1999; 341 (10): 709–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Leizorovicz A, Cucherat M. Economic evaluation of treatments of cardiac insufficiency. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 1994; 87 (2): 39–44PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Young JB. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in heart failure: new strategies justified by recent clinical trials. Int J Cardiol 1994; 43: 151–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Davie AP, McMurray JJ. ACE inhibitors and health-care economics. Coron Artery Dis 1995; 6 (4): 315–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gerbrandt KR, Yedinak KC. Formulary management of ACE inhibitors. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 10 (6): 594–613PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Giles T. The cost-effective way forward for the management of the patient with heart failure. Cardiology 1996; 87 Suppl. 1: 33–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Szucs TD. Pharmacoeconomics of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in heart failure. Am J Hypertens 1997; 10 (10 Pt 2): S272–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Boyko Jr WL, Glick HA, Schulman KA. Economics and cost-effectiveness in evaluating the value of cardiovascular therapies: ACE inhibitors in the management of congestive heart failure: comparative economic data. Am Heart J 1999; 137 (5): S115–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Results of the Cooperative North Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS). The CONSENSUS Trial Study Group. Effects of enalapril on mortality in severe congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 1987; 316 (23): 1429–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cohn JN, Archibald DG, Ziesche S, et al. Effect of vasodilator therapy on mortality in chronic congestive heart failure. Results of a Veterans Administration Cooperative Study. N Engl J Med 1986; 314 (24): 1547–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    The SOLVD Investigators. Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 1991; 325 (5): 293–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    The SOLVD Investigators. Effect of enalapril on mortality and the development of heart failure in asymptomatic patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions. N Engl J Med 1992; 327 (10): 685–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pfeffer MA, Braunwald E, Moye LA, et al. Effect of captopril on mortality and morbidity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction: results of the survival and ventricular enlargement trial. The SAVE Investigators. N Engl J Med 1992; 327 (10): 669–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    The Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE) Study Investigators. Effect of ramipril on mortality and morbidity of survivors of acute myocardial infarction with clinical evidence of heart failure. Lancet 1993; 342 (8875): 821–8Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kober L, Torp-Pedersen C, Carlsen JE, et al. A clinical trial of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor trandolapril in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction. Trandolapril Cardiac Evaluation (TRACE) Study Group. N Engl J Med 1995; 333 (25): 1670–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hart W, Rhodes G, McMurray J. The cost-effectiveness of enalapril in the treatment of chronic heart failure. Br J Med Econ 1993; 6: 91–8Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    van Hout BA, Wielink G, Bonsel GJ, et al. Effects of ACE inhibitors on heart failure in The Netherlands: a pharmacoeconomic model. Pharmacoeconomics 1993; 3 (5): 387–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Paul SD, Kuntz KM, Eagle KA, et al. Cost and effectiveness of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitor in patients with congestive heart failure. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154: 1143–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Glick H, Cook J, Kinosian B, et al. Costs and effect of enalapril therapy in patients with symptomatic heart failure: an economic analysis of the Studies Of Left Ventriacular Dysfunction (SOLVD) treatment trial. J Card Fail 1995; (1): 371–80Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Butler JR, Fletcher PJ. A cost-effectiveness analysis of enalapril maleate in the management of congestive heart failure in Australia. Aust N Z J Med 1996; 26 (1): 89–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Scott WG, Scott HM. Heart failure: a decision analytic analysis of New Zealand data using the published results of the SOLVD Treatment Trial. Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 9 (2): 156–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Le Pen C, Levy E, Bonte J. Cost-effectiveness analysis of captopril treatment after myocardial infarction. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 1994; 87 (6): 775–81Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tsevat J, Duke D, Goldman L, et al. Cost-effectiveness of captopril therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 26 (4): 914–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Michel BC, Al MJ, Remme WJ, et al. Economic aspects of treatment with captopril for patients with asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction in The Netherlands [see comments]. Eur Heart J 1996; 17 (5): 731–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hummel S, Piercy J, Wright R, et al. An economic analysis of the Survival And Ventricular Enlargment (SAVE) study: application to United Kingdom. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 12: 183–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Erhardt L, Ball S, Andersson F, et al. Cost effectiveness in the treatment of heart failure with ramipril. A Swedish substudy of the AIRE study. Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy [published erratum appears in Pharmacoeconomics 1997 Dec; 12 (6): 706]. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 12 (2 Pt 2): 256–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Martinez C, Ball SG. Cost-effectiveness of ramipril for patients with clinical evidence of heart failure after acute myocardial infarction. Br J Clin Pract 1995; Suppl. 7/8: S26–32Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Schadlich PK, Huppertz E, Brecht JG. Cost-effectiveness analysis of ramipril in heart failure after myocardial infarction. Economic evaluation of the Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE) study for Germany from the perspective of Statutory Health Insurance. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 14 (6): 653–69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Le Pen C, Liliu H, Keller T, et al. The economics of TRACE: a cost-effectiveness analysis of trandolapril in post-infarction patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 14 (1): 49–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Garg R, Yusuf S. Overview of randomized trials of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors on mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure. JAMA 1995; 273: 1450–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Mason J, Drummond M, Torrance G. Some guidelines on the use of cost-effectiveness league tables. BMJ 1993; 306: 570–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS). CIBIS Investigators and Committees. A randomized trial of beta-blockade in heart failure. Circulation 1994; 90 (4): 1765–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study II (CIBIS-II): a randomised trial. Lancet 1999; 353 (9146): 9–13Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Packer M, Bristow MR, Cohn JN, et al. The effect of carvedilol on morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure. U.S. Carvedilol Heart Failure Study Group. N Engl J Med 1996; 334 (21): 1349–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Effect of metoprolol CR/XL in chronic heart failure: Metoprolol CR/XL Randomised Intervention Trial in Congestive Heart Failure (MERIT-HF). Lancet 1999; 353 (9169): 2001–7Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Dargie H. CAPRICORN: a multinational, randomized, double-blind study on the effects of carvedilol on mortalilty and morbidity in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction. American College of Cardiology 50th scientific session; 2001 Mar 18–21; Orlando (FL)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Packer M. COPERNICUS: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study to determine the effect of carvedilol on mortality in patients with severe chronic heart failure. American College of Cardiology 50th scientific session; 2001 Mar 18–21; Orlando (FL)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Levy P, Lechat P, Leizorovicz A, et al. A cost-minimization of heart failure therapy with bisoprolol in the French setting: an analysis from CIBIS trial data. Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1998; 12 (3): 301–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Schadlich PK, Paschen B, Brecht JG. Economic evaluation of the Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study for the Federal Republic of Germany. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13 (1 Pt 2): 147–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Malek M, Cunningham-Davis J, Malek L, et al. A cost minimisation analysis of cardiac failure treatment in the UK using CIBIS trial data. Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study. Int J Clin Pract 1999; 53 (1): 19–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Varney S. A cost-effectiveness analysis of bisoprolol for heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail 2001; 3: 365–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Levy P, Mérot JL, Lechat P, et al. Bisoprolol dans l’insuffisance cardiaque: efficacité et coûts dans le cadre français selon CIBIS II. Therapie 2001; 56: 421–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Reduced costs with bisoprolol treatment for heart failure: an economic analysis of the second Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS II). CIBIS II Investigators and Health Economic Group. Eur Heart J 2001; 22: 1021–31Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Delea TE, Vera-Llonch M, Richner RE, et al. Cost effectiveness of carvedilol for heart failure. Am J Cardiol 1999; 83 (6): 890–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Fowler M, Vera-Llonch M, Oster G, et al., Influence of carvedilol on hospitalizations in heart failure: incidence, resource utilization and costs. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37: 1692–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Eichorn EJ. Experience with beta-blockers in heart failure mortality trials. Clin Cardiol 1999; 22 Suppl. 5: V21-9Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Gregory D, Udelson J, Konstam H. Economic impact of beta blockade in heart failure. Am J Med 2001; 110 Suppl. 7A: 74–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Paul SD, Kuntz KM, Eagle KA, et al. Costs and effectiveness of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition in patients with congestive heart failure [see comments]. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154 (10): 1143–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Pitt B, Segal R, Martinez FA, et al. Randomised trial of losartan versus captopril in patients over 65 with heart failure (Evaluation of Losartan in the Elderly Study, ELITE). Lancet 1997; 349 (9054): 747–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Dasbach EJ, Rich MW, Segal R, et al. The cost-effectiveness of losartan versus captopril in patients with symptomatic heart failure. Cardiology 1999; 91 (3): 189–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Pitt B, Poole-Wilson PA, Segal R, et al. Effect of losartan compared with captopril on mortality in patients with symptomatic heart failure: randomised trial, the Losartan Heart Failure Survival Study ELITE II. Lancet 2000; 355 (9215): 1582–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Packer M, O’Connor CM, Ghali JK, et al. Effect of amlodipine on morbidity and mortality in severe chronic heart failure. Prospective Randomized Amlodipine Survival Evaluation Study Group. N Engl J Med 1996; 335 (15): 1107–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Cohn JN, Ziesche S, Smith R, et al. Effect of the calcium antagonist felodipine as supplementary vasodilator therapy in patients with chronic heart failure treated with enalapril: V-HeFT III. Vasodilator-Heart Failure Trial (V-HeFT) Study Group. Circulation 1997; 96 (3): 856–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Lombardi WL, Litwin SE. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: congestive heart failure and beyond. Coron Artery Dis 1999; 10 (6): 361–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Marius-Nunez AL, Heaney L, Fernandez RN, et al. Intermittent inotropic therapy in an outpatient setting: a cost-effective therapeutic modality in patients with refractory heart failure. Am Heart J 1996; 132 (4): 805–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Cuffe MS, Califf RM, Adams KF, et al. Rationale and design of the OPTIME CHF trial: outcomes of a prospective trial of intravenous milrinone for exacerbations of chronic heart failure. Am Heart J 2000; 139 (1 Pt 1): 15–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Thackray S, Witte K, Clark AL, et al. Clinical trials update: OPTIME-CHF, PRAISE-2, ALL-HAT. Eur J Heart Fail 2000; 2 (2): 209–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wood JM, Close P. Renin inhibitors: cardiovascular drugs of the future? Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1996; 10 (3): 309–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Klein H, Auricchio A, Reek S, et al. New primary prevention trials of sudden cardiac death in patients with left ventricular dysfunction: SCD-HEFT and MADIT-II. Am J Cardiol 1999; 83 (5B): D91–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Cannom DS. Other primary prevention trials-what is clinically and economically necessary? J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2000; 4 Suppl. 1: 109–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Leidy NK, Rentz AM, Zyczynski TM. Evaluating health-related quality-of-life outcomes in patients with congestive heart failure: a review of recent randomised controlled trials. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15 (1): 19–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Berry C, McMurray JJ. A review of quality-of-life evaluations in patients with congestive heart failure. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 16 (3): 247–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Pearson TA, Peters TD. The treatment gap in coronary artery disease and heart failure: community standards and the post-discharge patient. Am J Cardiol 1997; 80 (8B): H45–52Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Lee AJ. The role of financial incentives in shaping clinical practice patterns and practice efficiency. Am J Cardiol 1997; 80 (8B): H28–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Goldberg RJ, Meyer TE. Advances and stagnations in heart failure [editorial comment]. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157 (1): 17–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Auerbach AD, Hamel MB, Davis RB, et al. Resource use and survival of patients hospitalized with congestive heart failure: differences in care by specialty of the attending physician. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments [see comments]. Ann Intern Med 2000; 132 (3): 191–200PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    McMurray JJ. Failure to practice evidence-based medicine: why do physicians not treat patients with heart failure with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors? Eur Heart J 1998; 19 Suppl. L: L15–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Krumholz HM, Vaccarino V, Ellerbeck EF, et al. Determinants of appropriate use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors after acute myocardial infarction in persons > or = 65 years of age. Am J Cardiol 1997; 79 (5): 581–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Boccuzzi SJ. Economics and cost-effectiveness in evaluating the value of cardiovascular therapies. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in the management of congestive heart failure: a pharmaceutical industry perspective. Am Heart J 1999; 137 (5): S120–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Monane M, Bohn RL, Gurwitz JH, et al. Noncompliance with congestive heart failure therapy in the elderly [see comments]. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154 (4): 433–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Andersson F, Cline C, Ryden-Bergsten T, et al. Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and heart failure. The consequences of underprescribing. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15 (6): 535–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Bradford D, Chen J, Krumholz M. Under-utilization of beta-blockers after acute myocardial infarction, pharmacoeconomic implications. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15 (3): 257–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    McMurray JV, McDonagh TA, Davie AP, et al. Should we screen for asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction to prevent heart failure? Eur Heart J 1998; 19 (6): 842–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Afzal A, Brawner CA, Keteyian SJ. Exercise training in heart failure. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1998; 41 (3): 175–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Kornowski R, Zeeli D, Averbuch M, et al. Intensive home-care surveillance prevents hospitalization and improves morbidity rates among elderly patients with severe congestive heart failure. Am Heart J 1995; 129 (4): 762–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Paul S. Impact of a nurse-managed heart failure clinic: a pilot study. Am J Crit Care 2000; 9 (2): 140–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Stewart S. An economic analysis of specialist nurse management of heart failure: can we afford not to implement it? [abstract]. Eur Heart J 2001; 22: 626Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Bouhour JB. Education of patients with heart failure. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 1998; 91 (11): 1407–10Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Rich MW, Vinson JM, Sperry JC, et al. Prevention of readmission in elderly patients with congestive heart failure: results of a prospective, randomized pilot study. J Gen Intern Med 1993; 8 (11): 585–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Fonarow GC, Stevenson LW, Walden JA, et al. Impact of a comprehensive heart failure management program on hospital readmission and functional status of patients with advanced heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997; 30 (3): 725–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Cline CM, Israelsson BY, Willenheimer RB, et al. Cost effective management programme for heart failure reduces hospitalisation [see comments]. Heart 1998; 80 (5): 442–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Rich MW, Beckham V, Wittenberg C, et al. A multidisciplinary intervention to prevent the readmission of elderly patients with congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1190–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Whellan DJ, Gaulden L, Gattis WA, et al. The benefit of implementing a heart failure disease management program. Arch Intern Med 2001; 161: 2223–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Schulman KA, Mark DB, Califf RM. Outcomes and costs within a disease management program for advanced congestive heart failure. Am Heart J 1998; 135 (6 Pt 2 Su): S285–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    McAlister FA, Lawson FM, Teo KK, et al. A systematic review of randomized trials of disease management programs in heart failure. Am J Med 2001; 110 (5): 378–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Tunstall-Pedoe H, Kuulasmaa K, Mahonen M, et al. Contribution of trends in survival and coronary-event rates to changes in coronary heart disease mortality: 10-year results from 37 WHO MONICA project populations. Monitoring trends and determinants in cardiovascular disease. Lancet 1999; 353 (9164): 1547–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Cleland JG. Improving patient outcomes in heart failure: evidence and barriers. Heart 2000; 84 Suppl. 1: i8–10, i50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Coats AJ. Beta-blockers: again, a lesson to us all, especially the research funding community [editorial]. Int J Cardiol 2000; 73 (2): 103–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Schulman KA, Glick H, Buxton M, et al. The economic evaluation of the FIRST study: design of a prospective analysis alongside a multinational phase III clinical trial. Flolan International Randomized Survival Trial. Control Clin Trials 1996; 17 (4): 304–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LEGOS (Laboratory of Health Organization Economics and Management)Paris Dauphine UniversityParisFrance

Personalised recommendations