Introduction: Recent studies show that treatment of arterial hypertension is unsuccessful. This is due to the patients' insufficient knowledge of about the therapeutic methods and the consequences of not treating arterial hypertension. Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate the patients' knowledge concerning therapeutic options, prophylaxis, and complications of arterial hypertension. The study also assessed the effect of such knowledge on hypertension treatment adherence and efficacy. Patients and Methods: The survey included 488 patients (250 female and 238 male), aged over 18 years, diagnosed with and treated in outpatient and inpatient settings at selected healthcare institutions in Poland. A custom-made questionnaire, based on references on this subject, was the key tool in the present study. Information about the course of the disease and evaluation of hypertension treatment efficacy was based on the patients' medical records. Results: The study found that 54.7% of the subjects had good knowledge about arterial hypertension, 40.0% had average knowledge, and 5.3% had poor knowledge. The extent of knowledge about the disease was significantly dependent on the level of education and the place of receiving medical care (p< 0.05). Good knowledge was significantly associated with controlled blood pressure, number of antihypertensive drugs used, frequency of hospitalization, as well as with medication adherence, and healthy lifestyle behaviours (p< 0.05). Conclusions: More than half of the patients presented good knowledge but a large group still had poor knowledge, especially patients with a low level of education and with hypertension treated at a general practitioner's clinic. The results of our study clearly show that knowledge about arterial hypertension affects medication adherence and healthy lifestyle behaviours and improves hypertension treatment efficacy.

No abstract

No abstract

The aim of the study was to compare the safety profiles (prevalence of both local and systemic side effects) of COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer–BioNTech, Moderna, Oxford–AstraZeneca) among healthcare workers (doctors, nurses, and pharmacists) administered with a first and a second dose of the vaccines. Another goal of the research was to evaluate potential demographic and clinical risk factors for the frequency and intensity of side effects. A post-marketing, cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out on a sample of 971 respondents (323 doctors, 324 nurses, and 324 pharmacists), all more than 18 years old, who have taken two doses of the following SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) (group 1), mRNA-1273 (Moderna) (group 2), and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford–AstraZeneca) (group 3). A validated, self-administered questionnaire was developed and delivered online to the target population group of healthcare workers. The survey was conducted during the third wave of the COVID-19 (1 February 2021–1 July 2021) pandemic. It was based on the CAWI (computer-assisted web interview) method. Questionnaires were disseminated using selected social media. The BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) vaccine was the most commonly administered COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare professionals in Poland (69.61%). Side effects following a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine were reported by 53.11% of respondents in group 1, 72% in group 2, and 67.59% in group 3. The following were the most common side effects regardless of the type of vaccine administered: pain at the injection site, headache, muscle pain, fever, chills, and fatigue. The number and intensity of reported side effects following administration of a BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) vaccine were significantly lower than in the other two study groups (p < 0.00001). Risk factors for side effects following administration of one of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines subject to the analysis included being female, young, and suffering from a diagnosed allergy. Our results clearly show that the short-term safety profiles of the eligible COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer–BioNTech, Moderna, Oxford–AstraZeneca) are acceptable. Nevertheless, the two-dose COVID-19 vaccines available in Poland differ significantly in the frequency of both local and systemic side effects and their intensity. Women, young people, and patients diagnosed with allergies are particularly exposed to the risk of side effects. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines.

No abstract

Reduced serum levels of adiponectin in obesity and insulin resistance seem paradoxical, since adipose tissue is the only source of adiponectin, and reports on that subject are contradictory. The aim of this study was to investigate the concentrations of adiponectin in non-obese and obese normoglycemic humans, and to determine the correlation between adiponectin and HOMA index of insulin sensitivity. Based on the WHO definition of obesity, 145 obese subjects and 49 non-obese controls (aged 20-55 years) were studied. The serum adiponectin concentrations did not differ between subjects and controls (p=0.6398) and were not correlated with HOMA index (r=-0.0211; p=0.8048, and r=-0.0523; p=0.4757, for subjects and controls, respectively). Adiponectin was not correlated with HOMA index in females (r=-0.0521; p=0.6546, and r=-0.0825; p=0.3981, for female subjects and controls, respectively) as well as in males (r=0.0033; p=0.9791, and r=0.0123; p=0.9131, for male subjects and controls, respectively). These results lead to the conclusion that neither the concentrations of adiponectin differ between obese and non-obese humans, nor does any relationship between adiponectin concentration and insulin sensitivity exist.

There has been enormous progress in antihypertensive therapy over the last few decades. However, the management of arterial hypertension is still insufficient and more efforts are needed to improve both non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment of this widely prevalent disease. Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibition is crucial both for blood pressure (BP) control and for prevention of organ damage or its development in patients with hypertension. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or sartans block RAAS incompletely. Aliskiren is one of the novel drugs that has been introduced to antihypertensive therapy recently. Up to now no trial has confirmed that aliskiren is efficacious in reducing cardiovascular events. Double RAAS blockade with aliskiren was not always safe. This review article presents the current view on the place of aliskiren in the therapy of arterial hypertension.

No abstract