ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Fixed-dose combination antihypertensive therapy and healthcare utilization in U.S. adults with hypertension: a propensity score-based analysis of a nationally representative population.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Fixed-dose combinationFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fixed-dose combination (FDC) antihypertensive therapy is recommended by contemporary guidelines to improve adherence and blood pressure control. However, real-world evidence evaluating its impact on healthcare utilization, compared with the multi-pill combination (MPC) therapy in hypertension (HTN) patients, remains limited. This study compared healthcare utilization among US adults with HTN receiving FDC versus MPC therapy. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study on nationally representative data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2013-2022). Adults aged ≥18 years with a diagnosed HTN on ≥2 antihypertensive classes were classified as FDC or MPC users. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was applied to balance covariates. Weighted negative binomial regression models were used to assess the impact of FDC versus MPC on healthcare utilization, including office-based visits, outpatient visits, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and prescription fills. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted as a sensitivity analysis to assess findings robustness. Results: Among 18,269 adults receiving ≥2 antihypertensive therapies, 5,849 were FDC users, and 12,420 were MPC users. Compared with MPC users, FDC users had significantly lower emergency department visits (rate ratio [RR] = 0.712; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.636-0.796; p < 0.0001), hospitalizations (RR = 0.721; 95% CI: 0.545-0.953; p = 0.0219), office-based visits (RR = 0.934; 95% CI: 0.879-0.993; p 0.0281), and prescription fills (RR = 0.853; 95% CI: 0.815-0.893; p < 0.0001). No significant difference was observed in the outpatient visit rate. Findings were consistent in PSM analysis. Conclusion: FDC antihypertensive therapy was associated with significantly lower acute care utilization and prescription burden while preserving routine outpatient care, compared with the MPC therapy. These findings support FDC therapy use as a high-value strategy to enhance real-world HTN management and reduce acute healthcare utilization.
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.