Literature DB >> 7768247

Patient compliance and therapeutic coverage: comparison of amlodipine and slow release nifedipine in the treatment of hypertension. The Belgian Collaborative Study Group.

J M Detry, P Block, G De Backer, J P Degaute.   

Abstract

To study patient compliance in hypertensive outpatients amlodipine (5 mg once daily) and slow release nifedipine (20 mg twice daily) were compared in an open, crossover study in general practices. Four methods of assessment for patient compliance (pill count, taking compliance, days with correct dosing, timing compliance) were used in both study arms. For the latter three assessment a special device, the medication event monitoring system, was used to record the time and date of each opening and closure of the container. The compliance of the 320 hypertensive patients with once-daily amlodipine was markedly superior to twice-daily slow release nifedipine. Therapeutic coverage was also significantly better for amlodipine in the hypertensive patients. Amlodipine was better tolerated than nifedipine slow release. Patient compliance and therapeutic coverage with the calcium antagonist amlodipine given once daily was superior to slow release nifedipine b.d. in hypertensive outpatients recruited in general practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7768247     DOI: 10.1007/BF00193697

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0031-6970            Impact factor:   2.953


  20 in total

1.  Measurement of patient compliance and the interpretation of randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  R Vander Stichele
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  Acute, chronic and postwithdrawal antihypertensive and renal effects of amlodipine in hypertensive patients.

Authors:  G Leonetti; L Rupoli; R Chianca; C Catarrasi; M P Ruffilli; A Zanchetti
Journal:  J Hypertens Suppl       Date:  1991-12

3.  Open evaluation of amlodipine in the monotherapeutic treatment of systolic hypertension in the elderly.

Authors:  M F Vandewoude; M Lambert; R Vryens
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 3.105

4.  How often is medication taken as prescribed? A novel assessment technique.

Authors:  J A Cramer; R H Mattson; M L Prevey; R D Scheyer; V L Ouellette
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1989-06-09       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  To be taken as directed.

Authors:  M S Gatley
Journal:  J R Coll Gen Pract       Date:  1968-07

6.  Propranolol-withdrawal rebound phenomenon. Exacerbation of coronary events after abrupt cessation of antianginal therapy.

Authors:  R R Miller; H G Olson; E A Amsterdam; D T Mason
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1975-08-28       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Antihypertensive medication-taking. Investigation of a simple regimen.

Authors:  D Guerrero; P Rudd; C Bryant-Kosling; B Middleton; B ] Middleton BF [corrected to Middleton
Journal:  Am J Hypertens       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 2.689

8.  Working ability and exercise tolerance during treatment of a mild hypertension. I. Comparison between a beta-adreno-receptor blocking drug and a calcium antagonist.

Authors:  K Lange Andersen; W Piatkowski; K A Green; W Ottmann
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 3.015

9.  Patients compliance in hypertension--the importance of number of tablets.

Authors:  J Asplund; M Danielson; P Ohman
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1984-05       Impact factor: 4.335

10.  Treatment of mild hypertension and the problem of compliance.

Authors:  G Onesti
Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 2.580

View more
  7 in total

1.  The odds of the three nons when an aptly prescribed medicine isn't working: non-compliance, non-absorption, non-response.

Authors:  John Urquhart
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Objective assessment of nonadherence and unknown co-medication in hospitalized patients.

Authors:  Florentine Carow; Karin Rieger; Ingeborg Walter-Sack; Markus R Meyer; Frank T Peters; Hans H Maurer; Walter E Haefeli
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-02-22       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 3.  Amlodipine. A reappraisal of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic use in cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  M Haria; A J Wagstaff
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  Efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine in the general practice treatment of essential hypertension in an asian multinational population.

Authors:  S H Taylor; M F Chen; S J Lee; B Koanantakul; J R Zhu; T Santoso; R G Sy; Y T Tai
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 2.859

5.  Health expenditure comparison of extended-release metoprolol succinate and immediate-release metoprolol tartarate.

Authors:  Varun Vaidya; Pranav Patel
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2012-02-07

6.  Drug control of hypertension in primary health care centers-registered patients, Al-khobar, saudi arabia.

Authors:  A G Elzubier; M A Al-Shahri
Journal:  J Family Community Med       Date:  1997-07

Review 7.  Interventions for improving adherence to treatment in patients with high blood pressure in ambulatory settings.

Authors:  K Schroeder; T Fahey; S Ebrahim
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2004
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.