Cost-effectiveness of hypertension therapy based on 2020 International Society of Hypertension guidelines in Ethiopia from a societal perspective.

INTRODUCTION: There is inadequate information on the cost-effectiveness of hypertension based on evidence-based guidelines. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment based on 2020 International Society of Hypertension (ISH) guidelines from a societal perspective.
METHODS: We developed a state-transition Markov model based on the cardiovascular disease policy model adapted to the Sub-Saharan African perspective to simulate costs of treated and untreated hypertension and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted by treating previously untreated adults above 30 years from a societal perspective for a lifetime.
RESULTS: The full implementation of the ISH 2020 hypertension guidelines can prevent approximately 22,348.66 total productive life-year losses annually. The incremental net monetary benefit of treating hypertension based was $128,520,077.61 US by considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 US per DALY averted. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of treating hypertension when compared with null was $1,125.44 US per DALY averted. Treating hypertension among adults aged 40-64 years was very cost-effective 625.27 USD per DALY averted. Treating hypertensive adults aged 40-64 years with diabetes and CKD is very cost-effective in both women and men (i.e., 559.48 USD and 905.40 USD/DALY averted respectively).
CONCLUSION: The implementation of the ISH 2020 guidelines among hypertensive adults in Southern Ethiopia could result in $9,574,118.47 US economic savings. Controlling hypertension in all patients with or with diabetes and or CKD could be effective and cost-saving. Therefore, improving treatment coverage, blood pressure control rate, and adherence to treatment by involving all relevant stakeholders is critical to saving scarce health resources.

1. Introduction

Hypertension remains the leading cause of death globally, accounting for 10.4 million deaths per year [1]. It is associated with societal and economic consequences particularly in Low and middle-income countries (LMICs). In addition to the direct costs associated with health care utilization for the management of complications, hypertension causes significant productivity loss from disability and premature death [2, 3]. According to a global health estimate in 2016, the productive healthy life year lost due to hypertension in the African region was estimated to be 19,395,946 [4, 5].

Treating hypertension is associated with improved life expectancy, despite the disutility penalty associated with daily use of anti-hypertensives [6]. For example, a modeling study based on primary prevention trials showed that for patients with an initial BP of 160/95mmHg, those with antihypertensive treatment and diabetes, or antihypertensive treatment, diabetes, and currently smoking had corresponding gains of life expectancy of 12.50, 2.52, and 2.45 years, with a reduction in BP to 140/82mmHg [7]. The Cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment is influenced by both the absolute initial cardiovascular risk, and the relative risk reduction [8]. The cardiovascular disease policy model is used by many hypertension cost-effectiveness studies. It is a state-transition (Markov cohort) model of coronary heart disease and stroke incidence, prevalence, mortality, and costs over the age of 35 years [9-11].

Hypertension treatment is influenced by several factors including patient demographics like age, sex, race, and availability of evidence-based guidelines. In addition to this, cost-effectiveness strongly depends on social determinants. Hence, results obtained in one country may not be valid in another [12]. Therefore, it is important to know the value of money invested in treating hypertension, since controlling hypertension could not restore the ideal cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risks to that of the non-hypertensive population. In addition to this disutility associated with daily use of anti-hypertensive medicines mandates who should be treated and who should not. There was no study concerning the cost-effectiveness of treating hypertension patients based on evidence-based guidelines. To fill this evidence gap, generalized cost-effectiveness analyses (GCEAs) from a societal perspective were conducted in Southern Ethiopia by using a modified cardiovascular disease policy model [13-17].

2. Methods and materials

2.1. Study area and period

The study was conducted among three selected Hospitals in Southern Ethiopia namely Gamo, Gofa, and South Omo Zones starting from September 1, 2020 –to November 30, 2020, to generate direct medical and non-medical cost information. Southern nations and nationalities and Peoples Region (SNNPR) is one of the largest regions in Ethiopia, accounting for more than 10% of the country’s land area and an estimated population of 20,768,000 (May 2018) almost a fifth of the country’s population. The SNNPR region is divided into 12 administrative zones [18, 19]. Three Hospitals (Arba Minch, Sawula, and Jinka General Hospital) with experience in providing CVD care for five years or more in selected zones were included.

2.2. Study design

The cardiovascular disease (CVD) policy model is a computer-simulation, state-transition (Markov cohort) model of coronary heart disease and stroke incidence, prevalence, mortality, and costs in the population over age 35 years [9-11]. The Model was used by different countries to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment including the USA and China [16, 20]. A modified CVD policy model for Sub-Saharan Africa was used to simulate hypertension management, drug treatment, disease-related costs, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted by preventing CVD or loss in untreated hypertensive adults aged > 30 years over a lifetime horizon [15]. We run the model for 80 cycles with a cycle length of one year. The cost-effectiveness of treating hypertension-based ISH guidelines when compared with no treatment was conducted from a societal perspective. All methods were performed under relevant guidelines.

2.3. Population

The study populations are selected patients and their follow-up records of adult hypertensive patients in four selected Hospitals.

2.4. Eligibility criteria

All adult hypertensive patients having at least five years of follow-up visits before data collection and receiving care during the study period from selected facilities were included. However, patients who are unwilling to participate in this study, and patients who have less than five years of follow-up were excluded.

Cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment based on 2020 ISH guidelines.

Patient-related (socio-demographic characteristics, heart disease knowledge, healthy lifestyle and heart disease risk perception, presence of comorbidity, type of medications, treatment adherence, shared decision making, health-related quality of Life)

Health professional related (sociodemographic characteristics, qualification, experience, knowledge of evidence-based guidelines)

○ Medical costs (inpatient hospital stay/hospitalization cost, outpatient clinic visit, drug acquisition costs, drug administration cost, laboratory test, and imaging study costs)

○ Non-medical costs (transportation, meal, patient time cost due to treatment, cost due informal care by family or friends)

○ Indirect costs (absenteeism, presenteeism, unemployment, early retirement, disability, premature death)

2.6. Sample size and sampling technique

2.6.1. Sample size determination

The sample size was determined by using the single population proportion formula by taking the prevalence of patients who controlled their BP as 14% from the WHO 2016 BP control rate report [21-23] and Z value of 1.96 at a 95% confidence interval. We added 10% for non-response rate and two for design effect due to multi-stage sampling technique involvement. Finally, a formula giving a larger sample size was used. A total of 407 hypertensive adult patients who are on follow-up care will be included.

= 185 + (185 * 10%) = 203.5

= 203.5 *2 = 407

Where: n = is the sample size

Z= standard normal deviation, set at 1.96, correspond to the 95% confidence interval

d = is the desired level of precision/margin of error (0.05)

p= prevalence of patients taking anti-hypertensive (p=28.4%), and q is 1-p.

2.6.2. Sampling techniques

A multi-stage simple random sampling technique was used. We randomly selected three zones from a total of 12 zones found in the Southern region. Three general hospitals with experience in providing CVD care for at least five years from selected three zones were included in this study. The total sample size was allocated to these hospitals based on an estimated number of adult hypertensive patients attending respective hospitals (i.e., we included 212 patients from Arba Minch General hospital, 107 patients from Jinka general hospital, and 88 patients from Sawula general hospital). Finally, a consecutive sampling technique was applied in each facility until the desired sample size was achieved.

2.7. Data collection tools and procedures

Key model inputs variables include; the 2020 population of selected Zones, hypertension prevalence by treatment and control status, transition probabilities to death and healthy state, cost of diagnosis, and management. The data was collected from the National STEPS survey [24], systematic reviews [25-28], and our effectiveness study. Treated and controlled hypertension was defined based on the BP control target of ISH 2020 guideline (i.e., controlled, if BP < 130/80 mmHg for < 65 years and < 140/90 mmHg for ≥ 65 years and uncontrolled, if BP ≥ 130/80 mmHg for < 65 years and ≥ 140/90 mmHg for ≥ 65 years) [1].

2.7.1. Disease states and transition probabilities

The 2020 world population prospect estimate was used for the baseline population [29]. Coronary heart disease and stroke deaths in 2020 were extracted from the WHO-STEPS survey and systematic reviews. Coronary heart disease deaths and stroke deaths were CVD deaths and all other deaths were considered non-CVD deaths. The annual probability of CHD and stroke, data that are not available can be taken from well-accepted international studies like Framingham Heart Study due to lack of country-specific [30] and the Framingham Offspring Study [31], by contextualizing to Ethiopian scenario. The Framingham offspring studies 1–8 presented the 10-year CHD and stroke events, and we used annual CHD and stroke risk. We tested our annual risk assumption, by developing a scenario analysis with a linearly increasing risk of CVD events over the 10 years [32].

The mortality rate in 2015 stratified by sex and 5-year age groups in selected zones was used. We combined disease-related and disease-unrelated mortality in a multiplicative fashion. The demographic profile of the cohort was derived from the estimated resident population of Ethiopia in 2020. The rate of BP control was drawn from the National STEPs 2015 survey [24] and our effectiveness study. Identified rates were applied to projections from the 2019 United Nations World Population Prospects [33]. Transition probabilities (TP) and relative risk of mortality were taken from the natural history of hypertension studies with good quality [34-39] (S1 and S2 Tables).

The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors (MI, angina, heart failure, stroke, TIA) was estimated from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Incorporating the risk factor prevalence data in the relevant Framingham risk equation, the age and sex-specific probability of CHD and cerebrovascular disease (i.e., stroke and TIA) events were estimated. The probability of each health state was calculated using the age- and sex-specific CHD and cerebrovascular disease event distributions [24, 40]. To estimate the corresponding probabilities, separate relative risk estimates were used for CHD events (Angina, HF, and MI) and cerebrovascular diseases (stroke and transient ischemic attack). We assumed antihypertensive treatment affects the probability of every disease state similarly across all age and sex groups. Relative risk reductions attributable to antihypertensive treatment were extracted from the peer-reviewed literature [39, 41, 42]. We estimated the probability of death separately for (1) all-cause mortality in absence of hypertension and related complications for the productive age population and (2) mortality attributable to the included disease states. The first component was estimated using Ethiopian Life Table 2019, and the second component was calculated based on standardized mortality ratios extracted from literature [34] (S2 and S3 Tables).

Interventional trials suggested that it could be possible to achieve effective BP targets in about 70% of patients by improving adherence and/or intensifying therapy [35]. Incident coronary heart disease events were allocated to angina pectoris, MI, or cardiac arrest. Prevalence and joint distributions of Ethiopia’s risk factor values were estimated from the national STEPS survey [24]. Betas for risk function for non-blood pressure risk factors were estimated separately for the risk of incident coronary heart disease events, incident strokes, and non-CVD deaths from the Framingham offspring cohort [31]. Risk factors are assumed to affect the incidence of MI, arrest, and angina in proportion to the overall incidence of CHD, except tobacco smokers are assumed to have a higher relative risk for infarction and arrest [43]; and a proportionately lower coefficient for angina [24, 44]. Case-fatality rates, rates of MI, prehospital arrest deaths, and out-of-hospital cardiac arrests surviving to hospital discharge were estimated from evidence-based literature (S2 and S3 Tables).

Survival after a CHD event was estimated from international data sources (California data on the ratio of in-hospital survival to 30-day survival) [45] and calibrated based on the findings of Huffman et al. [46]. Stroke incidence was assumed to be independent of the risk of new-onset coronary heart disease in the same year. The number of hospitalized stroke cases was obtained from national and regional studies. The annual probabilities of stroke after MI [47, 48] and the probability of CHD in stroke patients were based on natural history studies and systematic reviews of BP control trials [49-54]. A 30-day heart failure mortality and re-hospitalization data were from the THESEUS-HF registry [55] and Korean Acute Heart Failure Registry (KorAHF) [56, 57] (S2 and S3 Tables). The background prevalence of CVD by age, sex, and CVD disease state (stroke, coronary heart disease, or both stroke and coronary heart disease) in 2020 was estimated from GBD 2017 [58] (S2 Table).

2.7.2. Cost estimation

Both direct and indirect costs were included in this study. The direct costs were divided into two subcategories: direct medical costs and direct non-medical costs. Direct medical costs include; inpatient stays, outpatient clinic visits, medical services, drug acquisition, dispensing, administration, monitoring, laboratory test, and imaging study costs. The costs associated with outpatient/inpatient visits were estimated by multiplying the numbers of outpatient visits related to hypertension by the outpatient costs per year (i.e., twelve times WHO cost per outpatient visit for secondary hospitals inflated to 2021) [59].

Data concerning medications prescribed for the management of hypertension, and associated comorbidities, and laboratory tests and imaging studies were collected by patient chart abstraction in index year (2020). The cost of medications used for management of hypertension and associated comorbidities was taken from Ethiopian Pharmaceutical supply agency Arba Minch regional hub selling price and retail price of Arba Minch General Hospital in 2020. The retail price of Arba Minch General Hospital was used because of the minimum distance from the Pharmaceutical supply agency hub, which could minimize the markup added to the retail price due to transportation costs. Costs of laboratory tests and imaging studies were also taken from Arba Minch Hospital Laboratory’s service price list. The salary scale of the health workforce was based on the federal ministry of health (FMOH) of Ethiopia (S4 Table).

Ongoing program costs for hypertension care were estimated from WHO tool outputs for CVD and diabetes care and the National strategic action plan (NSAP) for prevention & control of non-communicable diseases in Ethiopia from 2014-to 2016 and adjusted for the 2021 inflation target population [60]. Adjustment for the study population was done by multiplying the national cost by the proportion of the study population (i.e., 3%). National and regional cost estimates were based on the proportion of patients studied (i.e. 3% and 20%). We considered this strategy since the age and sex distribution of hypertension among different regions in the country did not vary significantly. The collected cost data were added up and averaged by using a bottom-up approach. Facility-based or reference costs were used during computing costs. The total medical cost of hypertension treatment was calculated as the sum of the product of medical costs with their respective unit prices. Costs were discounted at an annual rate of 3% and reported in 2021 USD [13, 61].

Direct non-medical costs include transportation costs and patient time costs due to care. The cost of patient time due to care was estimated by using the average daily wage of the patient (97.00 WTB) which was calculated from the average monthly income (2910.00 ETB) from our treatment effectiveness survey. Transportation cost was determined by using the cost of average traveling distance and local transportation tariff (42.00 ETB) in January 2021. According to EDHS 2016 survey showed that 33% of women and 88% of men are currently employed [34]. This proportion was used to determine the patient time cost due to care for employed groups. For the unemployed proportion, the average daily wage of daily laborers workers working 8 hours per day for 6 days per week was used (26.53 ETB) from the monthly wage of 796.00 ETB (420–1172 ETB) [62].

Indirect costs include productivity loss due to illness and the cost of death. Cost-of hypertension-related hospitalization was taken from WHO Choice [59], costs per inpatient stay and cost per inpatient bed day times duration of hospitalization inflated for 2021, and professional time (physician, nurse laboratory professional, and pharmacist time). If a patient had multiple admissions during the year, the costs for each admission were aggregated as the total costs [63]. Age and sex-specific mortality rates among the adult general population in Ethiopia were taken from EDHS 2016 survey and extrapolated to selected populations [34]. According to EDHS 2016, the probability of dying before age 50 years among adults ≥ 15 years was 10% and 12%, in women and men respectively [34]. Mortality risk in the general population attributed to those with and without hypertension using sex-specific estimates of the relative risk (RR) of all-cause mortality associated with hypertension by treatment and control status was derived from a study conducted in India [64]. A cohort study conducted in India among adults 20 years and above to determine the rate and risk of all-cause mortality among people with HTN showed that the incidence of deaths in the study was 4.28%. The relative risk of mortality was 3.13 (CI: 2.91–3.37) and 1.2 in the high BP group and at age of 60 years. The age-adjusted hazard ratio of all-cause mortality for the high BP group was 2.96 (2.56–3.42) [64] (S6–S9 Tables).

In 2020 crude death rate of the Ethiopian population-based on global estimates was 6.29 deaths per 1000 population (i.e. 680,032 deaths per 108,113,150) [65]. The estimated prevalence of hypertension among adults was calculated from National STEPS Survey 2016, systematic review and meta-analysis, World health organization report, and local studies (19.6%, for 15–30 years, 23% for 30–40 years, 25.9% for 40–49 years and 41.9% for 50 years and above [24, 34, 64, 66–69]). (S3 Table). The mean estimated prevalence of hypertension is 21.39%. The mean relative risk (hazard ratio) of all-cause mortality among the hypertensive population when compared to those without hypertension was 1.39 (0.95 to 1.95) [70]. Only 28.4% of patients with the diagnosis of hypertension were taking antihypertensive medication [24].

Years of life lost due to hypertension were determined by first calculating disability weights for specific ages based on BP control status (X). Then subtract this value (X) from the life expectancy of the Ethiopian population (i.e., 66.7 years for men, and 70.4 years for women) (Y). The productivity loss cost due to hypertension was calculated by multiplying Y with the sex-specific employment rate based on a monthly average income of 2059.078 ETB from the National STEPS survey 2015 adjusted for 2021 inflation (1.372) STEPS Survey, 2015 [24] and EDHS 2016 survey showed that 33% of women and 88% of men are currently employed [34] and for unemployed, 2019 minimum average monthly earnings (ETB) of daily laborers reported by the Ethiopian Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (MOLSA) 796 ETB (420–1172 ETB) [62]. Concerning, the cost of productivity lost due to premature mortality: first we calculated potential years of life lost (YLL) by subtracting life expectancy from the sex-specific age of death at which the death is recorded (Z). Then Z is multiplied by the number of deaths in each age group (Xi). Finally, we multiplied Xi with sex-specific employment rates like productivity loss due to hypertension-related morbidity above [71]. Excess mortality and morbidity due to hypertension to hypertension were determined by subtracting age and sex-specific morbidity and mortality among the general population from the hypertensive cohort. Both were determined by using age, sex, and blood pressure treatment status mortality rate per 1000 person-years (S9 Table).

2.7.3. Calculating Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs)

Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) are composed of years lived with disability (YLDs) and years of life lost due to premature mortality (YLLs) [72]. The YLDs arising from a disease or injury are the sum of the YLDs for each of the sequelae associated with that disease. The GBD 2015 study estimated YLDs by country, age, and sex for 2619 sequelae of 310 diseases and injuries [72]. The YLDs (morbidity component) of the DALYs, are calculated as follows [4]:

Disability weights of hypertensive heart disease, complications, and comorbidities were taken from WHO estimates of global health state weights, systematic reviews, and clinical or observational studies [73]. According to the Global burden of disease 2016 report, the average disability weight of hypertensive heart disease was 0.246 (0.201–0.300). Untreated 0.323 and treated and controlled 0.171 [74, 75] (S2 Table).

Years lost to live (YLLs), the mortality component of the DALYs, is calculated as follows:

DALYs for a specific cause are calculated as the sum of the YLLs from that cause and the YLDs for people living in states of less than good health resulting from the specific cause:

For a given cause c, age a, sex s, and year t

According to the GBD, 2010 study simplified calculation of DALYs was recommended. Therefore, we used a new normative standard life table for the loss function used to compute YLLs; calculate of YLDs simply as the prevalence of each sequela multiplied by the relevant disability weight; adjust for comorbidity in the calculation of YLDs, and no discounting for time or unequal age weights [76].

2.7.4. Adjusting for comorbidity

Patients with hypertension may have more than one disease, the addition of YLDs across causes may result in an overestimation of the total loss of health [77]. Therefore, it is recommended to estimate comorbidities using the assumption of independence within age-sex groups [4]:

Where P1+2 is the prevalence of the two comorbid diseases 1 and 2,

P1 is the prevalence of disease 1 and P is the prevalence of disease 2.

The combined disability weight for individuals with multiple conditions is estimated assuming a multiplicative model as follows:

Since prevalence YLDs are calculated for each cause as:

Two preceding equations can be combined into a single calculation resulting in:

2.7.5. Cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment

Generalized CEA was conducted from a societal perspective to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment based on the ISH 2020 guideline [78]. Generalized cost-effectiveness analysis (GCEA) was used to derive average cost-effectiveness ratios (ACERs) for the full implementation of ISH guidelines. The Cost-effectiveness of interventions is judged by their incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) which is given as the ratio of the incremental cost of the intervention to its incremental health gain relative to a comparator. The ratio was reported as cost expressed in monetary units per health gain (e.g., the cost in USD per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. ICER informs us of how much additional cost the intervention under consideration requires for a unit increase in health benefits over its comparator. Therefore, the lower the ratio, the more cost-effective the intervention is [13]. ICERs equal to one to three times the per capita gross domestic product of Ethiopia (936 USD in 2020) [79] were considered cost-effective. An ICERs below USD 936.30 per DALY averted was considered very cost-effective and above 2,808.90 USD (122,187.15 ETB) were not cost-effective. In addition to this, we used half of the GDP per capita threshold (468.15 USD or 20,364.53 ETB) as it is more in accord with countries’ realities than the 1–3 GDP per capita, and could be used as an interim rule of thumb rather than the 1–3 GDP rule [80]. Results were presented based on Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) [81].

2.7.6. Model assumptions and transition probabilities

When the hypertensive population enters the model they can be in one of two health states: a treated and untreated hypertension. People in a treated/untreated state move to a treated controlled/uncontrolled state, then people in a controlled or uncontrolled state can move to a non-fatal CHD and stroke event state or the dead state. Once people are diagnosed as having hypertension, they receive antihypertensive treatment, and they will get a reduction in their risk of having a cardiovascular event [82]. We assumed that truly normotensive people can become hypertensive over time because there is an additional possibility in a cycle that they will have a BP check-up annually and move back to a hypertension state. The probability will be estimated from the annual probability of developing hypertension based on age and sex distribution. Once a person has moved to a non-fatal event state (MI, UA, SA, stroke, or TIA) they stay there unless they die. This was considered a reasonable simplification for modeling purposes and also reflected in 12 trials where an individual is censured at their first event. The non-fatal CHD and stroke events were assumed to have two states; event and post-event. This is so that a different cost can be applied in the first cycle reflecting acute management and/or diagnostic costs. The event state is a tunnel state where patients move automatically to the post-event state in the next cycle (unless they die). The probability of death due to the CVD states will vary by type of event. Once people have moved to the dead state in the model they cannot of course move elsewhere; this is known as an absorbing state. To avoid modeling errors, we used the TECH-VER verification checklist containing five domains [input calculations; event-state calculations; result calculations; uncertainty analysis calculations; and other overall checks (e.g. validity or interface)] to reduce errors in models and improve their Credibility [83].

2.7.7. Blood pressure treatment assumptions

According to guidelines, after a brief trial period of lifestyle interventions, patients with hypertension selected for pharmacologic treatment were grouped into those with or without diabetes or CKD. For the initial choice of antihypertensive agent, blacks were recommended to start with any thiazide diuretic, calcium channel blocker (CCB) not necessarily ACEIs/ARBs. Patients with diabetes and CKD were recommended to start with an ACE or an ARB. The BP response to different agents is similar in most patients [84] and we chose not to model differential use of antihypertensive medication classes in order not to bias cost-of-treatment inputs. Antihypertensive dose intensification and frequency of BP monitoring were based on the heart’s technical package guideline for blood pressure control. We did not simulate the effects of any particular medication; instead, we simulated “standard dose” effects and assumed average drug prices across classes [85] (S10 and S11 Tables).

The amount of BP change was assumed to be a function of the baseline BP and the effect of a standard-dose antihypertensive agent at that pre-treatment level [86] (S9 and S10 Tables). It is important to note that for patients with very high BP (mean SBP of ≥185 mmHg) it is assumed that even with taking four standard dose medications, these patients would on average achieve a BP of about 143 mmHg, but not a target of <140 mmHg. Another important consideration is the effect of true treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) [87]. We did not include the effect of TRH on costs and outcomes due to a lack of national data. Other important assumptions include, that hypertensive deaths reported or recorded on hospital registries were considered hypertension-related unless specified as due to other causes. All Disabilities in hypertensive patients are considered as disabilities due to hypertension except for comorbidities and accidents. Both costs and outcomes for cost-effectiveness analysis were discounted at 3 and 6% discount rates.

2.8. Data quality control, processing, and analysis

Questionnaires are prepared in English and the patient interview part of the questionnaire was translated into Amharic and translated back into English to check its consistency. The Amharic version of the patient interview questionnaire and English version of the health professional interview, data abstraction form, and health system interview questionnaires was used for data collection. The questionnaire was pretested on 30 adult hypertensive patients in Arba Minch General Hospital to ensure that the respondents could understand the questions and to check for consistency and possible amendments were made based on findings. Six professional nurses (BSc.) for data collection and one senior professional working in the respective health facilities for supervision were oriented before data collection about data collection approaches and contents of the data collection format for one day by the principal investigator. Continuous follow-up and supervision were made by the principal investigator throughout the data collection period.

The collected data were checked for completeness and consistency by the principal investigator on daily basis on the spot during the data collection time. Then data were transcribed back to English for the patient interview part and entry was made using Epi-data 3.1 software. After data processing, analysis was done by using SPSS version 21.0 and Microsoft excel 2010. A summary of descriptive statistics was computed for productivity loss; direct and indirect costs, and the cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment, and the results were presented in figures and tables.

2.9. Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by Tehran University of medical sciences, Faculty of pharmacy, department of pharmacoeconomics, and pharmaceutical administration ethical review board with Approval ID: IR.TUMS.MEDICINE.REC.1399.674 and Arba Minch University College of medicine and health sciences Institutional review board with Reference number: IRB/T10/2012. After clarifying the study objective and confidentiality of the information; verbal informed consent was obtained from each respective hospital before data collection. All methods were performed under relevant guidelines.

3. Results

3.1. Description of the study

We used a state-transition Markov model for the population over the age of 30-years based on the cardiovascular disease (CVD) policy model adapted for the Sub-Saharan African context [9–11, 15]. Basic inputs used during model development and source of information were described below (Table 1). Concerning treatment modalities, six antihypertensive treatment packages (17 modalities), and six primary and secondary prevention and treatment packages were included (Table 2). Based on the ISH 2020 guidelines, approximately 16,661,325 adults aged 15 years and above were with high blood pressure in Ethiopia. Out of this only 28.4% (4,731,816) were taking antihypertensive medications and the remaining 71.6% (11,929,509) were not taking antihypertensive medications and eligible for treatment [24, 34, 64, 66–69]. In our study, treating hypertension to ISH 2020 guidelines target was projected to prevent approximately 22,348.66 total productive life-year losses annually. This equates 9,574,118.47 $US in 2021 (Table 3).

Table 1

Variables and input data for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment based on 2020 ISH guidelines in Southern Ethiopia, January 2021.

List of medicines	Unit	Retail Price in 2021 USD	Source
Acetylsalicylic Acid - 81mg–Tablet (Enteric Coated)	10x10	1.303	Ethiopian Pharmaceutical supply agency, Arba Minch Hub wholesale price 2021 and Arba Minch General hospital pharmacy retail price 2021
Adrenaline (Epinephrine)-0.1% in 1mL ampoule	Each	1.074
Amiodarone - 100mg–Tablet	10x3	9.337
Amlodipine - 10mg—Tablet	10x10	3.142
Amlodipine - 5mg–Tablet	10x10	2.243
Atenolol - 50mg–Tablet	10x10	1.749
Atorvastatin - 20mg–Tablet	10x10	5.831
Atorvastatin - 40mg–Tablet	10x3	4.195
Beclomethasone Propionate -100mcg/dose–Aerosol (Oral Inhalation)	200 MD	3.929
Candesartan - 8mg–Tablet	14x2	4.548
Captopril—12.5mg–Tablet	10x10	1.000
Captopril - 25mg–Tablet	10x10	0.802
Dexamethasone - 4mg/ml in 1ml Ampoule—Injection	10	0.118
Captopril + HCT (50mg + 25mg)-Tablet	10x10	1.708
Digoxin—0.25mg–Tablet	10x10	6.025
Enalapril Maleate - 10mg—Tablet	10x10	1.835
Enalapril Maleate - 5mg–Tablet	10x10	1.905
Enalapril Maleate– 2.5mg–Tablet	10x10	0.595
Enalapril Maleate +HCT (10 mg + 25 mg)-tablet	10x10	2.331
Glibenclamide - 5mg–Tablet	10x10	1.165
Glucose 40% in 20 mL–IV infusion	Each	0.076
Glyceryl Trinitrate—0.4mg–Tablet (Sublingual)	100	14.518
Hydralazine - 20mg/ml in 1ml ampoule—Injection	5	6.079
Hydrochlorothiazide - 25mg–Tablet	25x4	1.432
Insulin Isophane Biphasic (Soluble/Isophane Mixture)- (30 + 70) IU/ml in 10ml Vial -Injection (Suspension)	Each	2.539
Insulin Isophane Human - 100IU/ml in 10ml Vial -Injection (Suspension)	Each	2.988
Insulin Soluble Human - 100IU/ml in 10ml Vial	Each	3.165
Lovastatin - 20mg–Tablet	10x10	2.521
Metformin - 500mg–Tablet	10	0.828
Methyldopa - 250mg–Tablet	100x10	1.542
Metoprolol - 50mg–Tablet	10x10	2.814
Morphine sulphate-30mg-tablet	110	12.239
Nifedipine - 20mg–Tablet	10x10	1.749
Prednisolone—5 mg–Tablet	100x10	10.198
Propranolol - 40mg–Tablet	10x10	2.013
Propylthiouracil - 100mg—Tablet (Scored)	100	18.889
Salbutamol—0.1mg/dose—Aerosol (Oral Inhalation)	200 MD	3.492
Spironolactone - 25mg–Tablet	10x10	2.440
Thyroxin Sodium—0.1mg–Tablet	100	5.319
Valsartan + HCT (80mg +12.5mg)	7*2	1.146
Laboratory and imaging costs
Complete blood count		1.72	Arba Minch General Hospital Laboratory service price 2021
Fasting/random blood sugar		0.46
Lipid profile (LDL, HDL, Total cholesterol, Triglyceride)		3.68
Echocardiography		2.76
Electro cardiogram		8.05
Computed Tomography scan		27.59
Renal function test (bilirubin, creatinine)		1.84
Chest X-ray		16.69
Urine analysis		0.34
Body fluid analysis		2.30
H.pylori		1.15
Liver function test (AST, ALT, ALP)		2.76
Thyroid function test (T3, T4, TSH)		9.93
Hospital bed days
Primary hospital		1.21	WHO Choice [59] inflated to 2021
Secondary hospital		1.26
Tertiary hospital		1.63
Health facility visit		0.00
Primary hospital		0.43
Secondary hospital		0.49
Tertiary hospital		0.51
Health center visit		0.53
PCI intervention		1448.28
In-patient costs for MI		1040.00
In-patient costs for Stroke		940.00
Outpatient cost for IHD (per annum)		45.00
Outpatient cost for Stroke (per annum)		67.00
Salary scale of human resource		0.00
Physician		485.06	Federal Ministry of Health, Ethiopia 2012/2019
Acute care nurse		171.72
Pharmacy personnel		184.99
Laboratory technician		148.51
Program costs in 2021 $US		Cost	Source
Monitoring and Evaluation		18,760,664.35	National strategic action plan for prevention & control of NCDs 2014–2016 [60].
Health Promotion		11,435,622.57
National Systems Response		3,962,354.33
Total national cost		34,158,641.24
Program costs for our study area		1,024,759.24
Program cost per person per annum		128.28
Monthly program cost per person		10.69
Monthly program cost of study population		4,340.032

1USD = 20.999 ETB in 2016 and 43.5 in 2021; PPP = 12.1/8.1 = 1.5.

MD: metered Dose; 1 USD = 43.5 January 2021.

Note: 30% mark-up at regional EPSA hub, 31% mark-up at Public Hospital level.

Estimated hypertensive population by using 21.39 mean prevalence of hypertension (+15 years) in southern Ethiopia = 750,533.

Table 2

Treatment modalities for managing high blood pressure based on ISH 2020 guidelines among adult hypertensive patients in antihypertensive drug public hospitals in Southern Ethiopia (n = 406).

Classification of hypertension ISH 2020	BP level	Target BP (optimal)	Anti-hypertensive regimen
Grade 1 hypertension	140-159/90-99 mmHg	< 130/80 mmHg if tolerated in age < 65 years OR <140/90mmHg in ≥ 65 years	Monotherapy
			Amlodipine 5mg
			Nifedipine 20mg
			Enalapril 5mg
			HCT 25mg
			ACEI + CCB = dual low dose combination
			Amlodipine 5mg + Enalapril 5mg
			Nifedipine 20mg + Enalapril 5mg
			Amlodipine + Captopril
Grade 2 hypertension	≥ 160/100 mmHg		Nifedipine + Captopril
			ACEI + CCB = dual full dose
			Amlodipine + Enalapril
			Nifedipine + Enalapril
			Amlodipine + Captopril
Resistant hypertension	Hypertension despite treatment with 3 full standard dose first line antihypertensives		Nifedipine + Captopril
			ACEI + Diuretic = dual low dose
			HCT + Enalapril
			HCT + Captopril
			ACEI + Diuretic = dual full dose
			HCT + Enalapril
			HCT + Captopril
			Triple combination = ACEI + CCB + Diuretics
			ACEI + CCB + Diuretics + Spironolactone 12.5 – 50mg
Acute MI	Patient stabilization and recovery		ASA 325mg + Enalapril 20mg + Atenolol 50mg + Clpidogrel 300mg + Streptokinase 1.5 MIU
			Insertion of balloon tipped catheter with stent to blocked area (PCI)
Post-acute MI	Secondary prevention		ASA 81mg + Enalapril 20mg + Atenolol 50mg + Simvastatin 40mg daily for 30 Days
Acute stroke	Patient stabilization and recovery		ASA 160mg daily for 1 month
Post-acute stroke	Secondary prevention		ASA 81mg + Enalapril 20mg + simvastatin 40mg daily for 30 days
Primary prevention of IHD and stroke	Primary prevention		HCT 25mg + Atenolol 50mg Daily + Simvastatin 40mg Daily
Combination drugs for absolute CVD risk	Secondary prevention		ASA 100mg + HCT 25mg + Atenolol 50mg + Simivastin 20mg

Table 3

Projected annual productive loss due to premature mortality (YLL) due to hypertension and hypertension-related morbidity (YLD) in Southern Ethiopia.

Years lost due to premature morality	Years	YLL (ETB)	YLL ($US)
Male	10,121	231,670,739.35	$ 5,325,764.12
Female	9,737	141,710,242.32	$ 3,257,706.72
Both sexes	19,858	373,380,981.67	$ 8,603,248.43
Years lost due to hypertension morbidity	Years	YLD (ETB)	YLD ($US)
Male	717.86	16,431,889.83	$ 377,744.59
Female	1,772.80	25,800,956.93	$ 593,125.45
Both sexes	2,490.66	42,232,846.75	$ 970,870.04
Total projected annual productive life years loss	22,348.66	415,613,828.42	$ 9,574,118.47

Note: Formula for calculating YLL or YLD: For male: = ((YLL/YLD*2059.078*0.88)*12) + ((YLL/YLD*796*0.12)*12) and for female: = ((YLL/YLD*2059.078*0.33)*12) + ((YLL/YLD*796*0.67)*12).

1$US = 43.5 ETB.

3.2. Cost-effectiveness of treating hypertension

The average cost-effectiveness of treating hypertension based on the ISH 2020 guideline was 800.23 USD/DALY averted (i.e. 46, 268.92 USD per 57.82 DALYs averted). The incremental net monetary benefit of treating hypertension based on ISH 2020 guidelines was 128,520,077.61 USD by considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of $ 50,000 US per DALY averted. The incremental cost-effective ratio of treating hypertension when compared with null was 1,125.44 $US per DALY averted. This was cost-effective based on one to three times the GDP threshold of Ethiopia (936 to 2,808 $US in 2020) [79].

We also evaluated the cost-effectiveness of treating hypertension at different ages and sex groups. Treating hypertension among adults aged 40–64 years was very cost-effective 625.27 USD per DALY averted (i.e., below 1 GDP per capita per DALY averted). Similarly, treating hypertension among adults aged 40–64 years was very cost-effective in men with ICER of 503.34 USD per DALY averted and in women with an Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 906.63 USD per DALY averted. However, treating hypertension below 40 years was not cost-effective 3,586.02 USD per DALY averted (i.e., above 2,483.75 USD, which is 3 times GDP per capita value) (Table 4).

Table 4

Projected average annual incremental results of treating adults with untreated hypertension between the ages of 33 and 64 years (2020–2030).

Age category	Cost treated		Cost untreated		DALYs treated	DALYs untreated		Incremental cost	Incremental DALYs	ICER*	Remark
≥ 65 years	20,313.65		27,944.78		29.24	40.38		7,631.13	11.14	685.02
40–64 years	688,568.54		1,062,069.53		922.48	1,519.82		373,500.99	597.34	625.27
< 40 years	243,259.23		416,786.63		103.36	151.75		173,527.40	48.39	3,585.02
Hypertension treatment effectiveness by age and sex category
	Cost treated		Cost untreated		DALYs Treated		DALYs Untreated		ICER Male	ICER Female	Remark
	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female
≥ 65 years	8,902.42	11,411.22	8,732.35	19,212.43	351.05	796.99	9.29	31.09	0.49763	-10.19
40–64 years	260,567.37	428,001.17	328,634.76	733,434.76	311.19	733.50	446.42	1,070.39	503.34	906.63
< 40 years	213,460.15	29,799.08	359,549.53	57,237.10	39.89	63.49	58.53	93.22	7838.42	922.98
Note: GDP per capita in 2020 was 936.30 USD: The intervention is said to be cost-effective if it costs one to three times GDP per capita (936.30 to 2,808.90) per DALY averted.*: USD/DALYs averted: DALYs: Disability-adjusted Life years
	Very cost-effective: Less than one GDP per capita per DALY averted (<936.30 USD)
	Cost-effective: One to three GDP per capita per DALY averted (936.30 to 2,808.90 USD)
	Not cost-effective: More than three GDP per capita per DALY averted (>2,808.90 USD)

3.3. Hypertension patients with DM and or CKD

Concerning the value for money in treating hypertension with diabetes and or chronic kidney disease (CKD), treating adult patients with hypertension and diabetes and or CKD could save 20,021,734.10 ETB (460,269.75 USD) annually. Treating hypertension among adults aged 40–64 years with diabetes, and or CKD was cost-effective with an ICER of 798.59 USD per DALY averted. Treating adults below 40 years with hypertension and diabetes and or CKD was cost-effective in women with ICER of 513.72 USD per DALY averted but not cost-effective in men with ICER of 9,353.91USD per DALY averted. Treating hypertensive adults aged 40–64 years with diabetes and CKD is very cost-effective (i.e., less than 1 GDP per capita per DALY averted) in both women and men (i.e., 559.48 USD and 905.40 USD/DALY averted respectively). We also evaluated the cost-effectiveness of treating hypertension based on a half per capita income threshold value. Based on this threshold (468.15 USD) treating hypertension at all ages for both sexes is not cost-effective. However, treating hypertension patients with diabetes and or CKD aged 65 years and above is cost-effective based on half per capita income threshold with an ICER of 202.54 USD per DALY averted) (Table 5).

Table 5

Projected average annual incremental results of treating adults with untreated hypertension and diabetes, and or chronic kidney diseases above the Ages of 33 Years (2020–2030).

Age category	Cost treated	Cost untreated		DALYs treated		DALYs untreated			ICER*		Remarks
≥ 65 years	2,603.17	2,851.43		2.62		3.84			203.49
40–64 years	581,694.25	902,913.17		1,149.12		1,551.36			798.58
< 40 years	152,971.26	291,773.84		82.50		121.13			3,593.13
Treatment effectiveness by age and sex category patients with diabetes, and or CKD
Age category	Cost treated		Cost untreated		DALYs Treated		DALYs untreated		ICER Male	ICER Female	Remarks
	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female
40–64 years	227,818.67	353,875.57	298,226.64	604,686.53	364.25	784.24	490.09	1061.26	559.48	905.40
< 40 years	126,500.45	26,470.81	240,958.59	50,815.24	26.14	35.36	38.37	82.753	9353.91	513.72
≥ 65 years	2,603.17	0.00	2,851.42	0.00	2.17	0	3.84	0	148.15	-
	Very cost-effective: Less than one GDP per capita per DALY averted (<936.30 USD)
	Cost-effective: One to three GDP per capita per DALY averted (936.30 to 2,808.90 USD)
	Not cost-effective: More than three GDP per capita per DALY averted (>2,808.90 USD)

Note: Projected Average Cost-Effectiveness of Full Implementation of the 2020 ISH Guidelines for hypertension treatment in patients without Cardiovascular Disease, According to Sex, Age, Hypertension Stage, and Status concerning Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease.

CKD; chronic kidney disease, DALYs; disability-adjusted life years, and ICER; incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

* USD/DALYs averted

3.4. Hypertension in adults without DM and or CKD

Treating hypertension in adults without diabetes or CKD was not cost-effective below 40 years with an ICER value of 3557.872 USD per DALY averted. Treating hypertension in patients 40 years and above without diabetes and or CKD was cost-effective for both men and women with ICER of 1,101.59 USD per DALY averted in men and 1,034.52 USD per DALY averted in women (Table 6).

Table 6

Projected average annual incremental results of treating adults with untreated hypertension without diabetes, and or chronic kidney diseases between the ages of 33 and 64 Years (2020–2030).

Age category	Cost treated		Cost untreated		DALYs treated	DALYs untreated			ICER*		Remarks
40–64	105,770.27		168,181.09		214.60	291.76			808.8494
≥ 65 years	24,069.13		29,865.03		31.26	41.11			588.4171
< 40 years	90,287.98		125,012.80		20.86	30.62			3557.872
Treatment effectiveness by age and sex category patients with no diabetes, and or CKD
Age category	Cost treated		Cost untreated		DALYs Treated		DALYs Untreated		ICER Male	ICER Female	Remarks
	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female
40–64 years	31,644.69	74,125.60	39,432.90	128,748.22	-53.06	-50.74	-43.67	9.13	1,101.59	1,034.52
< 40 years	86,959.70	3,328.27	118,590.94	6,421.86	37.35	28.13	20.16	10.47	-3,968.79	-319.16
≥ 65 years	8,830.76	15,238.36	7,568.97	22,296.07	348.88	0	5.45	0.00	-231.52	-1,294.99
	Very cost-effective: Less than one GDP per capita per DALY averted (<936.30 USD)
	Cost-effective: One to three GDP per capita per DALY averted (936.30 to 2,808.90 USD)
	Not cost-effective: More than three GDP per capita per DALY averted (>2,808.90 USD)

CKD; chronic kidney disease, DALYs; disability-adjusted life years, and ICER; incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

* USD/DALYs averted; 1USD = 43.5 ETB.

3.5. Sensitivity analyses

Deterministic sensitivity analyses were done to assess the impact of uncertainty around key data inputs on the model outputs by using lower and upper estimates (S1–S5 Figs). These included the prevalence of hypertension (19.6 to 41.9%), discounting rate of 6%, cost of antihypertensive ± 20% variation, and blood pressure control rate of 50 to 70% [22, 35]. In addition, we modeled adherence levels that were 50% and 75% lower than those in clinical trials, penalties for pill-taking disutility 0.049 (0.031–0.072) (i.e., a decrease in the quality of life associated with taking a medication) [6], and a 1-year lag in achieving the target blood pressure. We also used probabilistic (Monte Carlo) simulation to sample uncertainty distributions concerning the effectiveness of blood pressure lowering with the use of antihypertensive drugs, the relative risk reduction in CVD with treatment, disutility penalty for the daily taking of antihypertensives, and side effects of medications. Uncertainty distributions were randomly sampled 1000 times, and 95% uncertainty intervals were calculated. Almost all probabilistic sensitivity analyses (≥99.7% of simulation results) predicted cost savings for the treatment of patients with hypertension, except for those in the age group below 40 years. The results were robust to all included variables. (S5 Fig).

4. Discussion

In this study, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of treating hypertension based on ISH 2020 guidelines by using a modified CVD policy adapted for the Sub-Saharan African context [9–11, 15]. Treatment hypertension to ISH 2020 guidelines target BP with a 75% control rate and was projected to prevent approximately 22,348.66 total productive life-year losses annually. This equates 9,574,118.47 $US in 2021. This is higher than 11,050 reported deaths (i.e. 30 patients per day) caused by hypertension in 2017 [88]. This could be explained by the increasing trend of hypertension and inadequate BP control in the country including in our study area. A cost-effectiveness analysis conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease in Ethiopia showed that combination drug treatment for individuals having >35% absolute risk of a CVD event in the next 10 years is cost-effective with ICER of US$67 per DALY averted and about US $7 million annually [89]. This is also supported by evidence from a study conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hypertension therapy according to 2014 guidelines by using cardiovascular disease policy model-based simulation modeling in the USA showed that full implementation of the new hypertension guidelines would result in approximately 56,000 fewer cardiovascular events and 13,000 fewer deaths 13,000 deaths annually [90].

The average cost-effectiveness of treating hypertension was 800.23 USD/DALY averted (i.e. 46, 268.92 USD per 57.82 DALYs averted). The incremental net monetary benefit of treating hypertension was 128,520,077.61 USD by considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of $ 50,000 US per DALY averted and 20,151,503 USD by considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of $ 2,808.90 US per DALY averted (three times National GDP per capita).

A modeling study conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of improved hypertension management in India showed that at 70% coverage and adherence, the hypertension control intervention would be cost-saving overall [91].

The incremental cost-effective ratio of treating hypertension when compared with null was 1,125.44 $US per DALY averted. This was cost-effective based on one to three times the GDP threshold of Ethiopia (936 to 2,808 $US in 2020) [79]. A WHO-CHOICE analysis of the cost-effectiveness of population-level and individual-level interventions to combat non-communicable disease in Eastern sub-Saharan Africa Asia showed that treatment options for cardiovascular disease (CVD) are highly cost-effective (ICER < 100 in.$ per DALY averted) [92].

In this study, treating hypertension among adults aged 40–64 years was very cost-effective with an ICER of 625.27 USD per DALY averted. Treating hypertensive adults aged 40–64 years was more cost-effective for men than women with ICER of, 503.34 USD per DALY averted 906.63 USD per DALY averted respectively. This could be due to the high risk of CVD risk factors like smoking, and alcohol consumption in men than in women. Because at a younger age, coronary heart disease (CHD) incidence and mortality were ≈3-fold and ≈5-fold greater in men. The differences in smoking rate contributed markedly to the excess CHD risk of men because smoking could also decrease HDL cholesterol levels [93].

This is supported by evidence from a study conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hypertension therapy according to 2014 guidelines in the USA showed that treatment of stage 1 hypertension was intermediate or low cost-effective for women between the ages of 35 and 44 years [90].

Treating adults with hypertension and diabetes and or CKD could save 460,269.75 USD annually. Treating hypertension among adults aged above 40 years with diabetes, and or CKD was cost-effective with ICER of 798.59 USD per DALY averted for age 40–64 years and 203.49 USD per DALY averted for age 65 years and above. Treating hypertension in adults without diabetes or CKD was not cost-effective below 40 years with an ICER of 3,593.13 USD per DALY averted. This is in line with the existing evidence available on clinical practice guidelines that suggested treating high-risk patients for reducing cardiovascular and cerebrovascular complications and all-cause mortality among hypertensive populations [94-96]. Treating hypertensive adults aged 40–64 years with diabetes and CKD is very cost-effective for men and cost-effective for women. This could be explained by variation in risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular complications, and life expectancy in men and women.

Treating hypertension in patients without diabetes and or CKD was cost-effective for both men and women aged 40–64 years with ICER of 1,101.59 USD per DALYs averted in men and 1,034.52 USD per DALY averted in women. This is supported by a simulated modeling study conducted for a 10-year time horizon to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment in the USA showed that for stage 1 HTN but without diabetes or CKD, cost savings extended to ICER $57,000/QALY & $46,000/QALY in non-Hispanic black males and females aged 35–44 years respectively [16].

5. Strengths and limitations

We used the CVD policy model adapted for the Sub-Saharan African perspective. The results were reported based on Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). All transition probabilities of cardiovascular and stroke events and effectiveness assumptions were based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Valuation of productivity loss was done from a societal perspective. One way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were done. However, we could underestimate the national economic loss associated with hypertension due to, the use of computer simulation model-based analysis with several assumptions, uncertainty in age, and sex-specific prevalence of undiagnosed hypertension, using data from multiple sourcing. In addition to this, we did not analyze the effect of a healthy lifestyle on lowering blood pressure and specific antihypertensive medicines. Finally, we did not consider the role of implementing different guideline recommendations.

6. Conclusion

In conclusion, implementation of the 2020 ISH guidelines for Ethiopian hypertensive adults between the ages of 33 and 64 years could potentially prevent about 13,865 total deaths annually, and 46,501,793.85 USD economic losses. Treating hypertension without diabetes and or CKD below 40 years is not cost-effective based on one to three times the GDP per capita threshold value. Treating hypertension for patients 40–64 years old is cost-effective. Therefore, improving treatment coverage, blood pressure control rate, and adherence to treatment by involving all relevant stakeholders at all levels is critical to saving scarce health resources.

Proposed one cycle Model flow diagram for cost of hypertension in Ethiopia.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve based on the lower and upper bound of disutility for daily taking of antihypertensive medications.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve based on ±20% change of cost hypertension treatment.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve based on the lower bound discounting costs at 6% rate.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

ICER scatter plot and cost-effectiveness acceptability curve based on probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

(TIF)

Click here for additional data file.

Model parameters and probability of transition between states.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Simulation input parameters and disability weights for hypertension and related complications the global burden of disease 2013 study and WHO Global Health Estimates.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

World Health Organization (WHO); Ethiopian life table 2019.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Estimated working age population and percent distribution of women and men age 15–64 by employment status, according to, Ethiopia DHS 2016 and national STEPS survey and world population prospect, 2020.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Ethiopian population 2020 estimate and prevalence of hypertension in Ethiopia.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Risk of death across age and gender covariate categories stratified for hypertension.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Age-sex specific mortality.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Percent distribution of adult mortality rates, among 15–49, Ethiopia DHS 2016.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Annual mortality rate in the total population, those with hypertension by treatment and control status and those without hypertension in Ethiopia in 2021 by age group and sex based on literature review of systematic reviews and clinical trials.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Estimates of preventive effect of taking one or more blood pressure lowering drugs on coronary heart disease (CHD) events and stroke according to pretreatment systolic blood pressure, age, number of drugs, and dose (as multiple of standard).

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Estimates of preventive effect of taking one or more blood pressure lowering drugs on coronary heart disease (CHD) events and stroke according to pretreatment diastolic blood pressure, age, number of drugs, and dose (as multiple of standard33)32 then the effect of this blood pressure reduction on disease risk.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Survey questionnaire.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

Markov model data for CEA hypertension.

(XLTM)

Click here for additional data file.

30 May 2022

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Vanessa Carels

Staff Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please include additional information regarding the survey or questionnaire used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses. For instance, if you developed a questionnaire as part of this study and it is not under a copyright more restrictive than CC-BY, please include a copy, in both the original language and English, as Supporting Information.

3. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

4. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

5. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: General comments: the manuscript requires a major English grammar revision, but the study presented is robust and relevant.

Abstract:

“2020 international society of hypertension (ISH)” – capital letters for the name of the society (2020 International Society of Hypertension). In many other parts of the text the same problem has been identified.

The acronym ICER is not explained when it first appears.

Introduction

These sentences are not clear. They should be rewritten as part of a separate paragraph and would improve from adding some examples of its use, especially in LMIC, and its general rationale.

“The cardiovascular disease policy model which addresses all relevant contributors to the model is used by many hypertension cost-effectiveness studies. It is a computer-simulation, state-transition (Markov cohort) model of coronary heart disease and stroke incidence, prevalence, mortality, and costs over age 35 years (9-11).”

Methods

In section 2.2 (Study design) part of the information on the model could be transferred to the introduction. The modeling rationale and details are well presented.

Nevertheless, for the productivity costs attributable to hypertension, why were YLL (years of life lost) used instead of YPLL (years of productive life lost) as normally applied for Human Capital Approach methods? That means considering the years until retirement and not to full life expectancy. Additionally, were any discount rates applied to the estimates?

Regarding the sensitivity analyses, why were probabilistic simulations (Monte Carlo) limited to 1,000 draws? In general, final results of modelling studies are presented for 5,000 or 10,000 Monte Carlo draws for purposes of the robustness of the estimates.

Results

The study is based on estimates of the projected impact of hypertension treatment. Commonly recent modelling studies use rounded estimates (ie. To the nearest thousand or using to 2 or 3 significant digits), so that a false idea of precision is avoided in the results. Additionally, it would be helpful to add the uncertainty intervals to the tables and overall results.

Discussion

In terms of the limitations, it seems as no time-lag between the implementation of the guidelines and changes in outcomes was considered in the modeling.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

7 Jun 2022

Title: Cost-effectiveness of hypertension therapy based on 2020 International society of hypertension guidelines in Ethiopia from a societal perspective

Thank you for showing gaps in our manuscript. I accepted some your suggestions. I answered questions which require clarification as follows.

Reviewer #1: General comments: the manuscript requires a major English grammar revision, but the study presented is robust and relevant.

Answer: English re-edited

Abstract:

“2020 international society of hypertension (ISH)” – capital letters for the name of the society (2020 International Society of Hypertension). In many other parts of the text the same problem has been identified.

The acronym ICER is not explained when it first appears.

Answer: Modified

Introduction

These sentences are not clear. They should be rewritten as part of a separate paragraph and would improve from adding some examples of its use, especially in LMIC, and its general rationale.

“The cardiovascular disease policy model which addresses all relevant contributors to the model is used by many hypertension cost-effectiveness studies. It is a computer-simulation, state-transition (Markov cohort) model of coronary heart disease and stroke incidence, prevalence, mortality, and costs over age 35 years (9-11).”

Answer: Modified

Methods

In section 2.2 (Study design) part of the information on the model could be transferred to the introduction. The modeling rationale and details are well presented.

Nevertheless, for the productivity costs attributable to hypertension, why were YLL (years of life lost) used instead of YPLL (years of productive life lost) as normally applied for Human Capital Approach methods? That means considering the years until retirement and not to full life expectancy. Additionally, were any discount rates applied to the estimates?

Answer: We used YLL, since we have Value of lost productivity questionnaire that excludes population above 64 years. We assigned zero for productivity loss for people above 64 years. This is equivalent with YPLL. It is provided as supplementary material entitled “markov-model for Cost-effectiveness analysis of hypertension Excel file”.

We adjusted for presence of comorbidities during estimation of YLL or YPLL. According to the GBD, 2010 study simplified calculation of DALYs was recommended. Therefore, we used a new normative standard life table for the loss function used to compute YLLs; calculate of YLDs simply as the prevalence of each sequela multiplied by the relevant disability weight; adjust for comorbidity in the calculation of YLDs, and no discounting for time or unequal age weights (76).

Regarding the sensitivity analyses, why were probabilistic simulations (Monte Carlo) limited to 1,000 draws? In general, final results of modelling studies are presented for 5,000 or 10,000 Monte Carlo draws for purposes of the robustness of the estimates.

Answer: Monte Carlo Simulation with 1,000 Iterations is minimum requirement for checking robustness of estimates. We used the minimum iteration size.

Results

The study is based on estimates of the projected impact of hypertension treatment. Commonly recent modelling studies use rounded estimates (i.e. To the nearest thousand or using to 2 or 3 significant digits), so that a false idea of precision is avoided in the results. Additionally, it would be helpful to add the uncertainty intervals to the tables and overall results.

Answer. We made many improvements on result section after revising the analysis many times.

Discussion

In terms of the limitations, it seems as no time-lag between the implementation of the guidelines and changes in outcomes was considered in the modeling.

Answer: The analysis was conducted on year 2021 and mentioning time lag as study limitation has little importance. We listed limitations that could affect the outcomes only.

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

9 Aug 2022

Cost-effectiveness of hypertension therapy based on 2020 International Society of Hypertension guidelines in Ethiopia from a societal perspective

PONE-D-21-28063R1

Dear Dr. M ende Mensa Sorato

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Eduardo Augusto Fernandes Nilson

Guest Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Thank you for addressing all the points from the peer reviewers.

Reviewers' comments:

12 Aug 2022

PONE-D-21-28063R1

Cost-effectiveness of hypertension therapy based on 2020 International Society of Hypertension guidelines in Ethiopia from a societal perspective

Dear Dr. sorato:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Eduardo Augusto Fernandes Nilson

Guest Editor

PLOS ONE