ArticleJournal of hypertension2025
Treating hypertension with single pill combinations: a simple strategy to save costs for the patients and payers.
Article in Journal of hypertension, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Triple drug antihypertensive single-pill combinations included as WHO essential medicines: an overview of efficacy, safety, and cost.Journal of human hypertension · 2026Review
- Highlights of the 2026 Korean Society of Hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension: what's new and what has changed.Clinical hypertension · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesOur aim was to compare direct costs for single pill combinations (SPCs) and free-drug combinations for hypertension treatment.
methodsWe focused on Australia as a case study and reviewed total costs, and for the patient and government. We reviewed the Australian "Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme item drug map" considering different thresholds for the government safety net. Total costs included medicine costs and pharmacy fees.
resultsFor patients, SPCs always cost less than free-drug combinations, with greatest savings for general patients before reaching safety net (averaging 30%). For government, SPCs cost on average less than free-drug combinations, for Concession Card holders both before (averaging 11%) and after reaching safety net (averaging 26%) and in general patients after safety net (averaging 11%). There was a slight increase in costs (16%) for the government for patients before reaching safety net. All findings were driven by savings in dispensing fees, the main cost of supply, also after the recent introduction of 60-day dispensing.
conclusionSingle pill combinations, instead of free-drug combinations, result in cost saving for both patient and government in almost all cases and often these savings are large. SPC cost savings should be factored into prescribing decisions, both for people receiving multiple pills and people starting treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.