Search

Background: Hypertension among persons with childbearing potential is on the rise. Maintaining proper blood pressure during pregnancy is vital to prevent maternal and neonatal complications. Yet, limited evidence on the risk-benefit of various antihypertensives presents challenges for informed decision-making during this critical period. This study aimed to examine the utilization patterns of different classes of antihypertensives among persons with pre-existing hypertension before, during, and after pregnancy. Methods: We used MarketScan® Commercial Database 2011−2020 to analyze antihypertensive utilization among pregnant persons aged 12 to 55 identified via a validated algorithm. Pre-existing hypertension was defined as ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient encounters for hypertension within the 180 days preceding the LMP. Antihypertensive utilization was described during target periods: 0–3 months (0-3M) before pregnancy, 1st/2nd/3rd trimester (T1/2/3), 0-3M, and 4-6M after pregnancy. Results: We identified 1,950,292 pregnancies, of which 20,576 (12,978 live and 7,598 non-live) had pre-existing hypertension. Both groups had similar antihypertensive use (80.1% and 81.0%, respectively) during the 6 months before pregnancy (baseline). For live-birth pregnancies, 13.9% of baseline users discontinued treatment during pregnancy, while 28.9% of non-users initiated antihypertensives during pregnancy, and 17.2% started postpartum. Before pregnancy, the predominant antihypertensives included thiazide diuretics (21.9%), combined α- and β-blockers (18.4%), and dihydropyridines (16.2%). During pregnancy, thiazide diuretics, cardioselective β-blockers, and ACE inhibitors declined (T3: 3.0%, 4.2%, and 0.8%). Dihydropyridine use was steady during pregnancy, but preference shifted from amlodipine to nifedipine in T3 (2.2.% vs.10.8%). Central α2‐agonists increased during pregnancy (up to 15.2% in T3) compared to both pre- (9.8%) and post-pregnancy (5.7%). ARBs mirrored ACE inhibitors, with less than 1% utilization in later trimesters. Combination agents dropped from 10.8% pre-pregnancy to 0.8% in T3, then rebounded to 7.3% post-pregnancy. Conclusion: Research is warranted to evaluate the choice of antihypertensives and optimal timing to switch to safer alternatives, considering maternal and fetal outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The cost of medically attended RSV LRI (lower respiratory infection) is critical in determining the economic value of new RSV immunoprophylaxes. However, most studies have focused on intermittent RSV encounters, not the episode of care that captures the entirety of RSV illness. Methods: We created age‐ and condition‐specific cohorts of children under 5 years of age using MarketScan® data (2015–2019). We contrasted aggregating healthcare costs over RSV‐LRTI episodes to ascertaining costs based on RSV‐specific encounters only. Economic burden was estimated by multiplying costs per encounter or per episode by their respective incidence rates. Results: Average cost was higher per episode than per encounter regardless of settings (inpatient: $28,586 vs. $18,056 and outpatient/ED: $2099 vs. $407 for infants). Across ages, the economic burden was highest for infants and RSV‐LRTI requiring inpatient care, but the burden in outpatient/ED settings was disproportionately higher than costs due to higher incidence rates (for inpatient vs. outpatient episodes: $226,403 vs. $101,269; for inpatient vs. outpatient encounters: $151,878 vs. $38,819 per 1000 infant‐years). For high‐risk children, cost and burden were up to 3–10 times higher, respectively. Conclusions: With a comprehensive stratification by settings and risk condition, the encounter‐ versus episode‐based estimates provide a robust range for policymakers' economic appraisal of new RSV immunoprophylaxes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]