Efficacy of Different Antihypertensive Drugs among newly Diagnosed Hypertensive Patient in Dhulikhel Hospital

Humagain, S; Koju, Rajendra

doi:10.3126/kumj.v13i3.16806

Cited by 3 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…No additional eligible studies were found in Nepalese journals and on websites of Nepali professional and regulatory organisations, and national and international agencies. Finally, we included 15 studies (32,(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56)(57)(58)(59) for qualitative synthesis (Figure 2). None of the studies were included in the quantitative synthesis of effect sizes because of the significant differences in their aims, methods, interventions/exposures, and outcome measures.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five of the included studies that assessed the effectiveness of hypertension treatment and control strategies (48)(49)(50)(51)(52) were prospective comparative studies (n = 1) (52), randomised trials (n = 2) (49, 51), and uncontrolled before and after studies (n = 2) (48,50). Four out of these five studies reported systolic and diastolic blood pressure as outcome measures (48,49,51,52). The studies tested the effectiveness of health education (48)(49)(50)(51)(52) and combined, antihypertensive medication, and yoga ( 51) interventions (Supplementary Table 7).…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four out of these five studies reported systolic and diastolic blood pressure as outcome measures (48,49,51,52). The studies tested the effectiveness of health education (48)(49)(50)(51)(52) and combined, antihypertensive medication, and yoga ( 51) interventions (Supplementary Table 7).…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Barriers, Enablers and Strategies for the Treatment and Control of Hypertension in Nepal: A Systematic Review

Dhungana

Pedišić

Pandey

et al. 2021

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Understanding country-specific factors influencing hypertension care is critical to address the gaps in the management of hypertension. However, no systematic investigation of factors influencing hypertension treatment and control in Nepal is available. This study aimed to systematically review the published literature and synthesise the findings on barriers, enablers, and strategies for hypertension treatment and control in Nepal.Methods: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, ProQuest and WorldCat, and Nepali journals and government websites were searched for qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies on factors or strategies related to hypertension treatment and control in Nepal. Information from qualitative studies was analysed using template analysis, while results from quantitative studies were narratively synthesised. Summary findings were framed under “health system”, “provider”, and “patient” domains. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020145823).Results: We identified 15 studies; ten related to barriers and enablers and five to strategies. The identified barriers associated with the health system were: lack of affordable services and lack of resources. The barriers at the provider's level were: communication gaps, inadequate counselling, long waiting hours for appointments, lack of national guidelines for hypertension treatment, and provider's unsupportive behaviours. Non-adherence to medication, irregular follow-up visits, lack of awareness on blood pressure target, poor help-seeking behaviours, reluctance to change behaviours, perceived side-effects of anti-hypertensive medication, self-medication, lack of family support, financial hardship, lack of awareness on blood pressure complications, and comorbidity were barriers identified at patient level. The following enablers were identified: free essential health care services, family support, positive illness perception, and drug reminders. Strategies implemented at the health system, provider and patient levels were: establishing digital health records at health centres, health worker's capacity development, and health education.Conclusion: There is a range of barriers for hypertension treatment and control in Nepal pertaining to the health system, health providers, and patients. Comprehensive interventions are needed at all three levels to further improve management and control of hypertension in Nepal.

show abstract

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Barriers, Enablers and Strategies for the Treatment and Control of Hypertension in Nepal: A Systematic Review

Dhungana

Pedišić

Pandey

et al. 2021

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11 Though there is no sizeable generalized study showing a national prescription pattern of Nepal, diffuse studies done in both rural and town settings have shown CCBs as being the most commonly prescribed and effective drug class. [12][13][14] Vasodilatory edema was observed in 15.6% cases in our study. Similarly, one meta-analysis revealed 12.3% patients on DHPs developed peripheral edema, while it was present in 3.1% of hypertensive patients using non-DHPs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amlodipine-Induced Pedal Edema and Its Relation to Other Variables in Patients at a Tertiary Level Hospital of Kathmandu, Nepal

Khadka

Joshi

Shrestha

et al. 2018

Journal of Pharmacy Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vasodilatory edema is a frequently encountered side effect among hypertensive patients using antihypertensive drugs. Amlodipine and nifedipine are common drugs associated with vasodilatory edema. When used as monotherapy, calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are associated with a substantial risk of peripheral edema, including pedal edema, which is the most common reason for its discontinuation. 1 This is a dose-dependent adverse effect, so low-dose combination therapy is a preferred choice over high-dose monotherapy. It is less common with newer generation CCBs. 2 Reported rates of peripheral edema are dosedependent, ranging from 5% to 70% with a high dose. 3 Only 5% of pedal edema was seen with a 5 mg dose, 25% with a 10 mg dose, whereas >75% was seen with 20 mg of daily dose. 4 Ankle edema is developed mostly in women, elderly patients, those with heart failure, upright position, and those in humid environments. 5 CCB-related edema is caused by preferential arteriolar or precapillary dilation without commensurate dilation in the venous or postcapillary circulation. 3,6 The addition of an angiotensin 809005P MTXXX10.

show abstract

Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Valsartan and Hydrochlorothiazide Compared to Valsartan and Amlodipine in Stage 2 Hypertension

Karim

Iqbal

Bhatti

et al. 2022

J Shalamar Med Dent Coll

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hypertension is a growing medical and public health issue. The United States and European treatment guidelines have been issued to attain smooth control of hypertension in various categories of patients. It is a need of time to unveil safe combination therapies in various populations. Objectives: (i) To determine the efficacy of valsartan and hydrochlorothiazide versus valsartan and amlodipine (ii) To determine the safety and tolerability of both combinations. Materials & Methods: This experimental study was conducted at Shalamar Hospital Lahore. 126 patients with stage 2 hypertension were recruited from the medical outdoor of Shalamar Hospital Lahore after getting informed consent. In group A, 63 patients were given valsartan and hydrochlorothiazide. In group B, 63 patients were given valsartan and amlodipine. Blood pressure (BP) of both study groups was recorded on day zero, 2nd, 4th, and 8th weeks and the readings were entered on a Proforma. The efficacy of drug combinations was accessed in both groups by recording the change in mean systolic blood pressure (MSBP) and mean diastolic blood pressure (MDBP). The safety and tolerability of the drug combinations were assessed in terms of side effects and laboratory findings. Results: In group A, there was a 39±7mmzHg and 18±1mmHg decrease in MSBP and MDBP, respectively, from baseline BP. In group B, there was a 26.7±4mmHg and 14±2 mmHg decrease in MSBP and MDBP, respectively, from baseline BP. Both combinations were safe, and no significant difference in the efficacy of both combinations was observed after 8-week of treatment. Conclusion: Both combinations are effective for control of BP, but the valsartan and hydrochlorothiazide combination (group A) appears to have better tolerability and greater effect in decreasing BP as compared to the combination of valsartan and amlodipine (group B), although this difference is not statistically significant.

show abstract

Efficacy of Different Antihypertensive Drugs among newly Diagnosed Hypertensive Patient in Dhulikhel Hospital

Abstract: Background

Cited by 3 publications

References 11 publications

Barriers, Enablers and Strategies for the Treatment and Control of Hypertension in Nepal: A Systematic Review

Barriers, Enablers and Strategies for the Treatment and Control of Hypertension in Nepal: A Systematic Review

Amlodipine-Induced Pedal Edema and Its Relation to Other Variables in Patients at a Tertiary Level Hospital of Kathmandu, Nepal

Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Valsartan and Hydrochlorothiazide Compared to Valsartan and Amlodipine in Stage 2 Hypertension

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About