Issues in blood pressure control and the potential role of single-pill combination therapies.

Hypertension (HTN) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular mortality, yet only a small proportion of hypertensive individuals receive appropriate therapy and achieve target blood pressure (BP) values. Factors influencing the success of antihypertensive therapy include physicians' acceptance of guideline BP targets, the efficacy and tolerability of the drug regimen, and patient compliance and persistence with therapy. It is now well recognised that most hypertensive patients require at least two antihypertensive agents to achieve their target BP. However, complicated treatment regimens are a major contributory factor to poor patient compliance. The use of combination therapy for HTN offers a number of advantages over the use of monotherapy, including improved efficacy, as drug combinations with a synergistic mechanism of action can be used. This additive effect means that lower doses of the individual components can be used, which may translate into a decreased likelihood of adverse events. The use of single-pill combination therapy, in which two or more agents are combined in a single dosage form, offers all the benefits of free combination therapy (improved efficacy and tolerability over monotherapy) together with the added benefit of improved patient compliance because of the simplified treatment regimen. The use of single-pill combination therapy may also be associated with cost savings compared with the use of free combinations for reasons of cheaper drug costs, fewer physician visits and fewer hospitalisations for uncontrolled HTN and cardiovascular events. Thus, the use of single-pill combination therapy for HTN should help improve BP goal attainment through improved patient compliance, leading to reduced costs for cardiovascular-related care.

Validity of the ID-Migraine screener in the workplace.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of migraine on physical, social, and emotional performance is considerable, yet it remains an underdiagnosed disorder. ID-Migraine is a validated migraine-screening tool developed to facilitate diagnosis. This study evaluated the validity and use of the Turkish version of the ID-Migraine screener (ID-Ms) in the workplace, and measured the impact of headache on disability, productivity, and quality of life among the workforce. METHODS: A total of 465 employees from four companies were interviewed for screening with the ID-Ms. Subjects were included in the study if they reported two or more headaches in the past 3 months and gave a positive answer to one of the two ID-Ms prescreening questions. Eligible subjects completed the ID-Ms, the Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire, and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. Subjects were then evaluated for confirmation of their diagnosis according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd edition (ICHD-2) criteria. RESULTS: A total of 227 subjects (mean age 31.9 +/- 5.9 years; 65.6% women) completed the study. Migraine was diagnosed in 106 of the 227 subjects (46.7%) according to the ID-Ms and in 117 of the 227 subjects (51.5%) according to ICHD-2 criteria. The sensitivity of the ID-Ms was 70.9%, specificity was 79.1% and Cohen kappa value was 0.50. Workdays lost over the previous 3 months due to headache amounted to 8.7 +/- 9.5 days for migraine-positive and 4.9 +/- 6.6 days for migraine-negative subjects. CONCLUSION: The Turkish version of the ID-Migraine screener is a valid tool for identifying subjects with migraine in the workplace.

The economic consequences of noncompliance in cardiovascular disease and related conditions: a literature review.

OBJECTIVES: To review studies on the cost consequences of compliance and/or persistence in cardiovascular disease (CVD) and related conditions (hypertension, dyslipidaemia, diabetes and heart failure) published since 1995, and to evaluate the effects of noncompliance on healthcare expenditure and the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceutical interventions. METHODS: English language papers published between January 1995 and February 2007 that examined compliance/persistence with medication for CVD or related conditions, provided an economic evaluation of pharmacological interventions or cost analysis, and quantified the cost consequences of noncompliance, were identified through database searches. The cost consequences of noncompliance were compared across studies descriptively. RESULTS: Of the 23 studies identified, 10 focused on hypertension, seven on diabetes, one on dyslipidaemia, one on coronary heart disease, one on heart failure and three covered multiple diseases. In studies assessing drug costs only, increased compliance/persistence led to increased drug costs. However, increased compliance/persistence increased the effectiveness of treatment, leading to a decrease in medical events and non-drug costs. This offset the higher drug costs, leading to savings in overall treatment costs. In studies evaluating the effect of compliance/persistence on the cost-effectiveness of pharmacological interventions, increased compliance/persistence appeared to reduce cost-effectiveness ratios, but the extent of this effect was not quantified. CONCLUSIONS: Noncompliance with cardiovascular and antidiabetic medication is a significant problem. Increased compliance/persistence leads to increased drug costs, but these are offset by reduced non-drug costs, leading to overall cost savings. The effect of noncompliance on the cost-effectiveness of pharmacological interventions is inconclusive and further research is needed to resolve the issue.

The significance of compliance and persistence in the treatment of diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidaemia: a review.

OBJECTIVES: To review studies of patient compliance/persistence with cardiovascular or antidiabetic medication published since the year 2000; to compare the methods used to measure compliance/persistence across studies; to compare reported compliance/persistence rates across therapeutic classes and to assess whether compliance/persistence correlates with clinical outcomes. METHODS: English language papers published between January 2000 and November 2005 investigating patient compliance/persistence with cardiovascular or antidiabetic medication were identified through searches of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Definitions and measurements of compliance/persistence were compared across therapeutic areas using contingency tables. RESULTS: Of the 139 studies analysed, 32% focused on hypertension, 27% on diabetes and 13% on dyslipidaemia. The remainder covered coronary heart disease and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in general. The most frequently reported measure of compliance was the 12-month medication possession ratio (MPR). The overall mean MPR was 72%, and the MPR did not differ significantly between treatment classes (range: 67-76%). The average proportion of patients with an MPR of >80% was 59% overall, 64% for antihypertensives, 58% for oral antidiabetics, 51% for lipid-lowering agents and 69% in studies of multiple treatments, again with no significant difference between treatment classes. The average 12-month persistence rate was 63% and was similar across therapeutic classes. Good compliance had a positive effect on outcome in 73% of the studies examining clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Non-compliance with cardiovascular and antidiabetic medication is a significant problem, with around 30% of days 'on therapy' not covered by medication and only 59% of patients taking medication for more than 80% of their days 'on therapy' in a year. Good compliance has a positive effect on clinical outcome, suggesting that the management of CVD may be improved by improving patient compliance.