Literature DB >> 10160080

Selective versus nonselective beta adrenoceptor antagonists in hypertension.

L M Van Bortel1, A J Ament.   

Abstract

The application of cost-effectiveness methodology is particularly important in widespread diseases such as hypertension. However, because prospective cost-effectiveness analyses comparing different antihypertensive drugs are not currently available, differences in the cost effectiveness of these drugs can only be estimated. The purpose of this review is to estimate and compare the costs of drug therapy with selective and nonselective beta adrenoceptor antagonists in hypertension. The global costs of antihypertensive treatment are largely determined by drug costs. In most countries, drug costs do not appear to vary substantially between beta 1-selective and nonselective beta-blockers. The adverse sequelae of hypertension include stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiac hypertrophy and renal failure. There are no obvious differences in effect on stroke and cardiac hypertrophy between beta 1-selective and nonselective beta-blockers. However, compared with beta 1-selective antagonists, nonselective drugs might be less effective in preventing myocardial infarction in smokers and may impair renal function in patients with both increased peripheral resistance and declining cardiac output. There is a clear difference between beta 1-selective and nonselective beta-blockers on quality-of-life (QOL) perception. During treatment with nonselective beta-blockers, QOL perception is lower than during treatment with beta 1-selective drugs. Preservation of quality of life during long term antihypertensive treatment deserves considerable weight in economic analyses. Consequently, the more favourable effects of beta 1-selective agents on quality of life may outweigh the possible higher costs of these drugs, and suggest that beta 1-selective agents may be more cost effective than nonselective beta-blockers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 10160080     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199508060-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  73 in total

1.  Secondary prevention after high-risk acute myocardial infarction with low-dose acebutolol.

Authors:  J P Boissel; A Leizorovicz; H Picolet; J C Peyrieux
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1990-08-01       Impact factor: 2.778

Review 2.  The beta-receptor, atheroma and cardiovascular damage.

Authors:  J M Cruickshank; J C Smith
Journal:  Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 12.310

3.  Primary prevention with metoprolol in patients with hypertension. Mortality results from the MAPHY study.

Authors:  J Wikstrand; I Warnold; G Olsson; J Tuomilehto; D Elmfeldt; G Berglund
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1988-04-01       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Effect of antihypertensives on sexual function and quality of life: the TAIM Study.

Authors:  S Wassertheil-Smoller; M D Blaufox; A Oberman; B R Davis; C Swencionis; M O Knerr; C M Hawkins; H G Langford
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1991-04-15       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 5.  Hypertensive renal damage.

Authors:  M R Weir; M K Hise
Journal:  Cardiovasc Clin       Date:  1991

6.  Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension. Final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP). SHEP Cooperative Research Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1991-06-26       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Comparison of enalapril and atenolol in mild to moderate hypertension.

Authors:  A L Herrick; P C Waller; K E Berkin; S D Pringle; J S Callender; M P Robertson; J G Findlay; G D Murray; J L Reid; A R Lorimer
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 4.965

8.  Quality of life and its impact on hypertensive patients.

Authors:  G H Williams
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1987-01       Impact factor: 4.965

9.  The costs of treating hypertension in Sweden. An empirical investigation in primary health care.

Authors:  M Johannesson; L Borgquist; B Jönsson
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 2.581

10.  Screening for noncompliance among patients with hypertension: is self-report the best available measure?

Authors:  T S Inui; W B Carter; R E Pecoraro
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1981-10       Impact factor: 2.983

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.