BACKGROUND: Few comparative effectiveness studies of treatment strategies using antihypertensive therapeutic classes in hypertension control have been assessed in a primary care environment. The objectives are to compare the effectiveness of common antihypertensive therapeutic classes initiated as monotherapy and of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs), free-equivalent combinations (FECs), and monotherapy on hypertension control. METHODS: This article reports observational comparative effectiveness analyses of data electronically extracted from electronic health records. The study population consisted of 8,676 patients with an incident prescription for an antihypertensive agent of a total of 79,176 patients receiving antihypertensive therapy in 33 geographically diverse primary care clinics. The main measures were reductions in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and rates of attaining goals per the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC7). RESULTS: There were small, clinically insignificant differences in blood pressure reductions between the monotherapy classes. Higher rates of blood pressure control were obtained when patients were initiated on an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor than a thiazide or thiazide-like diuretic (47.8% vs 39.9%) or a β-blocker versus a thiazide (45.9% vs 39.9%). Patients initiated on FDCs had significantly larger reductions in blood pressure than patients initiated on FECs (-17.3 vs -12.0 mm Hg SBP; -10.1 vs -6.0 mm Hg DBP) or monotherapy (-17.3 vs -13.6 mm Hg SBP; -10.1 vs -7.9 mm Hg DBP). Rates of attaining JNC7 goals also were better for FDCs than FECs (57.2% vs 42.5%) and for FDCs versus monotherapy (57.2% vs 44.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients initiated on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and β-blockers had slightly higher rates of blood pressure control. The use of FDCs as initial therapy is more effective in the control of hypertension than monotherapy or FECs.
BACKGROUND: Few comparative effectiveness studies of treatment strategies using antihypertensive therapeutic classes in hypertension control have been assessed in a primary care environment. The objectives are to compare the effectiveness of common antihypertensive therapeutic classes initiated as monotherapy and of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs), free-equivalent combinations (FECs), and monotherapy on hypertension control. METHODS: This article reports observational comparative effectiveness analyses of data electronically extracted from electronic health records. The study population consisted of 8,676 patients with an incident prescription for an antihypertensive agent of a total of 79,176 patients receiving antihypertensive therapy in 33 geographically diverse primary care clinics. The main measures were reductions in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and rates of attaining goals per the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC7). RESULTS: There were small, clinically insignificant differences in blood pressure reductions between the monotherapy classes. Higher rates of blood pressure control were obtained when patients were initiated on an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor than a thiazide or thiazide-like diuretic (47.8% vs 39.9%) or a β-blocker versus a thiazide (45.9% vs 39.9%). Patients initiated on FDCs had significantly larger reductions in blood pressure than patients initiated on FECs (-17.3 vs -12.0 mm Hg SBP; -10.1 vs -6.0 mm Hg DBP) or monotherapy (-17.3 vs -13.6 mm Hg SBP; -10.1 vs -7.9 mm Hg DBP). Rates of attaining JNC7 goals also were better for FDCs than FECs (57.2% vs 42.5%) and for FDCs versus monotherapy (57.2% vs 44.9%). CONCLUSIONS:Patients initiated on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and β-blockers had slightly higher rates of blood pressure control. The use of FDCs as initial therapy is more effective in the control of hypertension than monotherapy or FECs.
Entities:
Keywords:
Antihypertensives; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Drug Therapy; Hypertension; Practice-based Research; Primary Health Care
Authors: Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella Journal: Hypertension Date: 2003-12-01 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: J D Neaton; R H Grimm; R J Prineas; J Stamler; G A Grandits; P J Elmer; J A Cutler; J M Flack; J A Schoenberger; R McDonald Journal: JAMA Date: 1993-08-11 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: B J Materson; D J Reda; W C Cushman; B M Massie; E D Freis; M S Kochar; R J Hamburger; C Fye; R Lakshman; J Gottdiener Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1993-04-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andrew S Levey; Lesley A Stevens; Christopher H Schmid; Yaping Lucy Zhang; Alejandro F Castro; Harold I Feldman; John W Kusek; Paul Eggers; Frederick Van Lente; Tom Greene; Josef Coresh Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-05-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: R Collins; R Peto; S MacMahon; P Hebert; N H Fiebach; K A Eberlein; J Godwin; N Qizilbash; J O Taylor; C H Hennekens Journal: Lancet Date: 1990-04-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: William C Cushman; Charles E Ford; Paula T Einhorn; Jackson T Wright; Richard A Preston; Barry R Davis; Jan N Basile; Paul K Whelton; Robert J Weiss; Arnaud Bastien; Donald L Courtney; Bruce P Hamilton; Kent Kirchner; Gail T Louis; Tamrat M Retta; Donald G Vidt Journal: J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 3.738
Authors: Lucile Broséus; Daniel Vaiman; Jörg Tost; Camino Ruano San Martin; Milan Jacobi; Joel D Schwartz; Rémi Béranger; Rémy Slama; Barbara Heude; Johanna Lepeule Journal: BMC Med Date: 2022-10-20 Impact factor: 11.150
Authors: Kevin Fiscella; Gbenga Ogedegbe; Hua He; Jennifer Carroll; Andrea Cassells; Mechelle Sanders; Chamanara Khalida; Brianna D'Orazio; Jonathan N Tobin Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2015-09-12 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Chun Lin Chen; Daksha Desai-Krieger; Stephan Ortiz; Majid Kerolous; Harold M Wright; Parviz Ghahramani Journal: Am J Ther Date: 2015 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.688