| Title |
Economic Benefits of Treating High-Risk Hypertension with Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists (Blockers)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Drug Investigation, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2165/00044011-200828040-00002 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antonio Coca |
| Abstract |
Hypertension is one of the leading risk factors for cardiovascular disease and represents a major health and economic burden. Most patients with high- or very high-risk hypertension have multiple cardiovascular risk factors with or without accompanying subclinical organ damage or established cardiovascular or renal disease. Patients with severe hypertension or with moderate hypertension and one to two additional risk factors have absolute 10-year risks of cardiovascular disease of 21-30% and 15-20%, respectively. Current European treatment guidelines recommend that antihypertensive therapy be initiated rapidly and aggressively in patients with high-risk hypertension. Most patients require two or more antihypertensive agents to achieve the strict blood pressure target of <130/80 mmHg. This article reviews the existing cost-effectiveness data on the use of angiotensin II receptor antagonists (blockers) [ARBs] in patients with high-risk hypertension. Aggressive ARB treatment of patients in the early (microalbuminuric) stages of diabetic nephropathy has a significant renoprotective effect, delaying the onset of overt (proteinuric) nephropathy. By slowing the progression of these patients to end-stage renal disease, substantial cost savings can be made. There is a paucity of cost-effectiveness data regarding the use of fixed-dose ARB plus thiazide diuretic combination therapies. Longitudinal cost-benefit studies of this attractive and efficacious first-line treatment option are needed. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 25% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 January 2023.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Drug Investigation
#318
of 1,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,827
of 186,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Drug Investigation
#94
of 344 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,035 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 186,740 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 344 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.