3种长效钙通道阻滞药治疗轻、中度原发性高血压的成本-效果分析

Cost-effectiveness analysis of three common long-term calcium channel blockers in treatment of mild-to-moderate primary hypertension

目的评价3种常用长效钙通道阻滞药治疗轻、中度原发性高血压的疗效和成本-效果。方法门诊轻、中度原发性高血压患者180例随机分为3组,每组60例,分别口服硝苯地平30 mg、非洛地平5 mg和氨氯地平5 mg,每日1次,疗程8 wk,观察3组疗效并进行成本-效果分析。结果硝苯地平、非洛地平和氨氯地平有效率分别为90%、93%和95%,3组间无显著差异(P>0.05);成本-效果比分别为11.54、10.35和11.28,以非洛地平组为参照,硝苯地平和氨氯地平的增量成本-增量效果比分别为22.06和62.59。结论非洛地平治疗轻、中度原发性高血压成本-效果优于硝苯地平和氨氯地平。

AIM To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of three common long-term calcium channel blockers in treatment of mild-to-moderate primary hypertension. METHODS One hundred and eighty mild-to-moderate primary hypertension patients in the clinic were randomized into three groups, 60 for each group, and respectivdy oral nifedipine 30 mg, felodipine 5 mg and amlodipine 5 mg at once daily, followed for 8 weeks. The therapeutic effects were observed and were evaluated by cost-effectiveness analysis. RESULTS The clinical efficacies of the nifedipine group, the felodipine group and the amlodipine group were 90%, 93% and 95%, respectively, with no significant differences in the three groups （P 〉 0.05）. The cost-effectiveness ratios of the nifedipine group, the felodipine group and the amlodipine group were 11.54, 10.35 and 11.28, respectively. To make the felodipine group as the baseline, the incremental cost-incremental effectiveness ratios of the nifedipine group and the amlodipine group were 22.06 and 62.59. CONCLUSION The cost-effectiveness of felodipine is superior to nifedipine and amlodipine in the treatment of mild-to-moderate primary hypertension.