Interaction between Clonidine and Desipramine in Man

Interaction between the tricyclic antidepressant desipramine and the antihypertensive agent clonidine has been investigated in five hypertensive patients in a double-blind placebo controlled study. Introduction of the tricyclic antidepressant led to loss of blood pressure control in four of the patients. The average blood pressure rise in the desipramine period compared with the placebo period was 22/15 mm Hg in the lying position and 12/11 mm Hg standing. Thus addition of a tricyclic antidepressant may lead to loss of blood pressure control in a hypertensive patient treated with clonidine.     

Value of low dose combination treatment with blood pressure lowering drugs: analysis of 354 randomised trials

Objective To determine the average reduction in blood pressure, prevalence of adverse effects, and reduction in risk of stroke and ischaemic heart disease events produced by the five main categories of blood pressure lowering drugs according to dose, singly and in combination.Design Meta-analysis of 354 randomised double blind placebo controlled trials of thiazides, β blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, and calcium channel blockers in fixed dose.Subjects 40 000 treated patients and 16 000 patients given placebo.Main outcome measures Placebo adjusted reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure and prevalence of adverse effects, according to dose expressed as a multiple of the standard (recommended) doses of the drugs.Results All five categories of drug produced similar reductions in blood pressure. The average reduction was 9.1 mm Hg systolic and 5.5 mm Hg diastolic at standard dose and 7.1 mm Hg systolic and 4.4 mm Hg diastolic (20% lower) at half standard dose. The drugs reduced blood pressure from all pretreatment levels, more so from higher levels; for a 10 mm Hg higher blood pressure the reduction was 1.0 mm Hg systolic and 1.1 mm Hg diastolic greater. The blood pressure lowering effects of different categories of drugs were additive. Symptoms attributable to thiazides, β blockers, and calcium channel blockers were strongly dose related; symptoms caused by ACE inhibitors (mainly cough) were not dose related. Angiotensin II receptor antagonists caused no excess of symptoms. The prevalence of symptoms with two drugs in combination was less than additive. Adverse metabolic effects (such as changes in cholesterol or potassium) were negligible at half standard dose.Conclusions Combination low dose drug treatment increases efficacy and reduces adverse effects. From the average blood pressure in people who have strokes (150/90 mm Hg) three drugs at half standard dose are estimated to lower blood pressure by 20 mm Hg systolic and 11 mm Hg diastolic and thereby reduce the risk of stroke by 63% and ischaemic heart disease events by 46% at age 60-69.     

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials of multiple risk factor interventions for preventing coronary heart disease.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of multiple risk factor intervention in reducing cardiovascular risk factors, total mortality, and mortality from coronary heart disease among adults. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in workforces and in primary care in which subjects were randomly allocated to more than one of six interventions (stopping smoking, exercise, dietary advice, weight control, antihypertensive drugs, and cholesterol lowering drugs) and followed up for at least six months. SUBJECTS: Adults aged 17-73 years, 903000 person years of observation were included in nine trials with clinical event outcomes and 303000 person years in five trials with risk factor outcomes alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, smoking rates, blood cholesterol concentrations, total mortality, and mortality from coronary heart disease. RESULTS: Net decreases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, smoking prevalence, and blood cholesterol were 4.2 mm Hg (SE 0.19 mm Hg), 2.7 mm Hg (0.09 mm Hg), 4.2% (0.3%), and 0.14 mmol/l (0.01 mmol/l) respectively. In the nine trials with clinical event end points the pooled odds ratios for total and coronary heart disease mortality were 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.92 to 1.02) and 0.96 (0.88 to 1.04) respectively. Statistical heterogeneity between the studies with respect to changes in mortality and risk factors was due to trials focusing on hypertensive participants and those using considerable amounts of drug treatment, with only these trials showing significant reductions in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled effects of multiple risk factor intervention on mortality were insignificant and a small, but potentially important, benefit of treatment (about a 10% reduction in mortality) may have been missed. Changes in risk factors were modest, were related to the amount of pharmacological treatment used, and in some cases may have been overestimated because of regression to the mean, lack of intention to treat analyses, habituation to blood pressure measurement, and use of self reports of smoking. Interventions using personal or family counselling and education with or without pharmacological treatments seem to be more effective at reducing risk factors and therefore mortality in high risk hypertensive populations. The evidence suggests that such interventions implemented through standard health education methods have limited use in the general population. Health protection through fiscal and legislative measure may be more effective.     

Overweight,Obesity, and Blood Pressure: The Effects of Modest Weight Reduction

Several large epidemiological studies have shown an association between body mass index and blood pressure in normal weight and overweight patients. Weight gain in adult life especially seems to be an important risk factor for the development of hypertension. Weight loss has been recommended for the obese hypertensive patient and has been shown to be the most effective nonpharmacological treatment approach. However, long‐term results of weight loss programs are disappointing with people often regaining most of the weight initially lost. In recent years, a modest weight loss, defined as a weight loss of 5% to 10% of baseline weight, has received increasing attention as a new treatment strategy for overweight and obese patients. A more gradual and moderate weight loss is more likely to be maintained over a longer period of time. Several studies have confirmed the blood pressure‐lowering effect of a modest weight loss in both hypertensive and nonhypertensive patients. A modest weight loss can normalize blood pressure levels even without reaching ideal weight. In patients taking antihypertensive medication, a modest weight loss has been shown to lower or even discontinue the need for antihypertensive medication. In patients with high normal blood pressure, a modest weight loss can prevent the onset of frank hypertension. The blood pressure‐lowering effect of weight loss is most likely a result of an improvement in insulin sensitivity and a decrease in sympathetic nervous system activity and occurs independent of salt restriction. In conclusion, a modest weight loss that can be maintained over a longer period of time is a valuable treatment goal in hypertensive patients.     

Treatment of Hypertension with Propranolol

When used in the treatment of hypertension propranolol is at least of similar potency to bethanidine, guanethidine, and methyldopa. Propranolol does not produce postural or exercise hypotension and it seems that it is often more acceptable to patients than conventional drugs. It usually produces the best control of the supine blood pressure.A series of 109 hypertensive patients was treated with propranolol; in nine the drug was withdrawn. In 92 of the patients a supine or standing blood pressure of 100 mm. Hg or less was achieved. Eighty of the patients had previously been treated with other potent drugs, and close comparisons and prolonged follow-up in 17 patients showed that diastolic pressures of 100 mm. Hg or less were achieved in more patients after propranolol than with guanethidine, bethanidine, or methyldopa.Sensitivity to propranolol varies widely, and dosage should be increased gradually. The hypotensive effect often takes six to eight weeks to reach its maximum. Propranolol reduces cardiac output but may also act by reducing the cardiac component of pressor stimuli; as a result the baroreceptors gradually regulate the blood pressure at a lower level. It is contraindicated in patients with obstructive airways disease or in uncompensated heart failure.     

Beta blockade,diuretics, and salt restriction for the management of mild hypertension: a randomised double blind trial.

Ninety four patients with mild hypertension (average supine diastolic blood pressure (phase V) 95-110 mm Hg) were allocated at random to receive restriction of dietary sodium (maximum allowed 70 mmol(mEq)/24 h) or a normal diet. In addition, they received in random order 25 mg chlorthalidone, 200 mg metoprolol (slow release), and a fixed combination of these two drugs. Each drug treatment was given for four weeks and alternated with four weeks of placebo. Forty four patients were allocated to sodium restriction (group 1) and 50 to normal diet (group 2). The mean 24 hour urinary sodium excretion in group 1 was 74 (SD 31) mmol(mEq)/24 h, and in group 2 132 (51) mmol/24 h. Compared with the screening blood pressure the average decrement of the supine blood pressure in group 1 was 16.0/8.6 mm Hg with placebo, 21.7/11.5 mm Hg with the diuretic, 28.5/17.8 mm Hg with the beta blocker, and 28.9/18.4 mm Hg with the combined agent; in group 2 these values were 13.3/6.1, 20.3/9.7, 21.3/12.9, and 29.4/16.8 mm Hg, respectively. There was a sharp decrease of the average potassium concentration during chlorthalidone and combination treatment periods (average value 3.3 mmol(mEq)/1). These results suggest that moderate salt restriction used as sole treatment has a limited though demonstrable blood pressure lowering effect but that when it is used as an adjuvant to beta blocker treatment its value is greatly enhanced.     

Choice of antihypertensive drug in the diabetic patient

The hypertensive patient with type 2 diabetes is especially at risk of adverse cardiovascular events. The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) and Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) studies suggested that treatment to a lower target blood pressure resulted in better prevention of clinical disease in these patients. Most trials comparing antihypertensive drugs have shown only minimal differences between the various agents. The evidence from the trials suggests that diuretics, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and the angiotensin-receptor antagonists (ARBs) will all successfully reduce adverse clinical events. The largest of the comparative hypertensive drug trials, the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT), demonstrated that a diuretic has a better hypotensive effect, and was more successful in preventing many aspects of cardiovascular disease compared with CCBs and ACE inhibitors. The importance of good blood pressure control and the general equivalence of antihypertensive drugs were again shown in the Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation (VALUE) trial, which compared an ARB with a CCB. Choice of antihypertensive agent should be individualized and guided by the presence of concomitant clinical disease and the need to protect any specific target organ system in the diabetic hypertensive. Diuretics, being potent hypotensive drugs with clearly demonstrated clinical benefit, should form part of the antihypertensive regimen of most diabetic hypertensives. ACE inhibitors and ARBs are especially useful in preventing nephropathy. Most patients will require a combination of antihypertensive drugs to achieve tight blood pressure control of under 130/80 mm Hg in the diabetic hypertensive. The clinician should concentrate on seeking this lower target blood pressure rather than be excessively concerned about which is the best antihypertensive agent.     

Atenolol and bendrofluazide in hypertension.

The effect of atenolol, a new beta-1-adrenergic receptor blocking agent, was studied in a double-blind cross-over trial in 24 carefully selected hypertensive outpatients. After a four-week run-in period on matching placebo each patient received atenolol 200 mg/day, atenolol 400 mg/day, a combination of atenolol 200/mg day with bendrofluazide 5 mg/day, and bendrofluazide 5 mg/day alone, according to a random sequence. Atenolol at either dose produced a significantly greater reduction in all blood pressure levels except standing systolic pressure than bendrofluazide alone. There was no statistically significant difference between the effects of the two atenolol doses on either blood pressure or pulse rate. The addition of bendrofluazide to atenolol resulted in a further significant lowering of the blood pressure. A significant effect of thiazide on weight was noted. The study shows that atenolol, a cardioselective beta-blocker of similar potency to propranolol in animals but without membrane-stabilizing or partial agonist acitivity, is an effective and well-tolerated hypotensive agent.     

高血压脑出血患者术后重症监护治疗与早期再出血的相关因素分析

目的:探究高血压脑出血患者术后重症监护治疗与早期(24 h内)再出血的相关因素。方法:回顾性分析2014年1月至2018年10月于中山大学附属第一医院及中山市人民医院行手术治疗并进行重症监护的高血压脑出血患者的相关资料,记录术后早期发生再出血情况,比较其相关因素,包括年龄、性别、术前格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)评分、出血量、术前收缩压、术后收缩压、镇静时间、插管时间、有无使用止血药、血压波动、血压差、有无镇痛情况,分析术后早期再出血的影响因素。结果:本研究共纳入465例患者,其中术后早期再出血患者44例,未再出血患者421例,再出血发生率为9.46%(44/465)。高血压脑出血术后早期再出血患者的术后收缩压、有无镇痛、血压差、血压波动与未再出血患者比较差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。术后早期再出血患者的年龄、性别及术前GCS评分、出血量、术前收缩压、镇静时间、插管时间、有无使用止血药与未再出血患者比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析显示,患者血压波动大是术后早期再出血的危险因素,手术前后血压差大、术后使用镇痛治疗是其保护因素。结论:高血压脑出血患者术后血压波动、手术前后血压差及术后镇痛治疗均是早期再出血的影响因素,合理降压及镇痛治疗可减少脑出血术后早期再出血的发生。     

Case-control study of stroke and the quality of hypertension control in north west England.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the risk of stroke in relation to quality of hypertension control in routine general practice across an entire health district. DESIGN: Population based matched case-control study. SETTING: East Lancashire Health District with a participating population of 388,821 aged < or = 80. SUBJECTS: Cases were patients under 80 with their first stroke identified from a population based stroke register between 1 July 1994 and 30 June 1995. For each case two controls matched with the case for age and sex were selected from the same practice register. Hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure > or = 160 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure > or = 95 mm Hg, or both, on at least two occasions within any three month period or any history of treatment with antihypertensive drugs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of hypertension and quality of control of hypertension assessed by using the mean blood pressure recorded before stroke) and odds ratios of stroke (derived from conditional logistic regression). RESULTS: Records of 267 cases and 534 controls were examined; 61% and 42% of these subjects respectively were hypertensive. Compared with non-hypertensive subjects hypertensive patients receiving treatment whose average pre-event systolic blood pressure was controlled to < 140 mm Hg had an adjusted odds ratio for stroke of 1.3 (95% confidence interval 0.6 to 2.7). Those fairly well controlled (140-149 mm Hg), moderately controlled (150-159 mm Hg), or poorly controlled (> or = 160 mm Hg) or untreated had progressively raised odds ratios of 1.6, 2.2, 3.2, and 3.5 respectively. Results for diastolic pressure were similar; both were independent of initial pressures before treatment. Around 21% of strokes were thus attributable to inadequate control with treatment, or 46 first events yearly per 100,000 population aged 40-79. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of stroke was clearly related to quality of control of blood pressure with treatment. In routine practice consistent control of blood pressure to below 150/90 mm Hg seems to be required for optimal stroke prevention.     

Biobehavioral treatment of essential hypertension: A group outcome study

In a group outcome and follow-up study of 77 patients with essential hypertension, significant reductions were seen in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) and in hypotensive medication requirement. A multimodality biobehavioral treatment was used which included biofeedback-assisted training techniques aimed at teaching self-regulation of vasodilation in the hands and feet. Of the 54 medicated patients, 58% were able to eliminate hypotensive medication while at the same time reducing BP an average of 15/10 mm Hg. An additional 19 (35%) of the medicated patients were able to cut their medications approximately in half while reducing BP by 18/10 mm Hg. The remaining 4 (7%) medicated patients showed no improvement in either BP or medication requirement. Similar reductions in BP were seen in initially unmedicated patients. Seventy percent of the 23 unmedicated patients achieved average pressures below 140/90 mm Hg, with an additional 22% of these patients making clinically significant reductions in pressure without becoming normotensive, and with 8% unsuccessful at lowering pressures to a clinically significant extent. Follow-up data available on 61 patients over an average of 33 months indicated little regression in these results with 51% of the total patient sample remaining well-controlled off medication, an additional 41% partially controlled, and 8% unsuccessful in lowering either medications and/or blood pressures to a clinically significant extent.This research was partially supported by grant HL-32136. The Authors wish to thank Sarah Bremer for her assistance in preparing this article.     

Biobehavioral treatment of essential hypertension: a group outcome study

In a group outcome and follow-up study of 77 patients with essential hypertension, significant reductions were seen in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) and in hypotensive medication requirement. A multimodality biobehavioral treatment was used which included biofeedback-assisted training techniques aimed at teaching self-regulation of vasodilation in the hands and feet. Of the 54 medicated patients, 58% were able to eliminate hypotensive medication while at the same time reducing BP an average of 15/10 mm Hg. An additional 19 (35%) of the medicated patients were able to cut their medications approximately in half while reducing BP by 18/10 mm Hg. The remaining 4 (7%) medicated patients showed no improvement in either BP or medication requirement. Similar reductions in BP were seen in initially unmedicated patients. Seventy percent of the 23 unmedicated patients achieved average pressures below 140/90 mm Hg, with an additional 22% of these patients making clinically significant reductions in pressure without becoming normotensive, and with 8% unsuccessful at lowering pressures to a clinically significant extent. Follow-up data available on 61 patients over an average of 33 months indicated little regression in these results with 51% of the total patient sample remaining well-controlled off medication, an additional 41% partially controlled, and 8% unsuccessful in lowering either medications and/or blood pressures to a clinically significant extent.     

Autorhythmometry in hypertension: some methodological aspects and clinical implications

Autorhythmometry of blood pressure is a technique easy to be performed and well accepted by hypertensive patients. A simple inspection of data self-collected 5 times a day for many days constitute a sufficiently reliable automonitoring of blood pressure both in basal conditions and in relation to the efficacy of some dietary and/or pharmacological treatment. Several examples are reported to show that more sophisticated statistical manipulation of the data collected may give rise to a better understanding of some clinical and physiological aspects. Both analysis of variance, performed on individual subsets of data averaged at each sampling hour, and single cosinor, performed on longitudinal time series, may be used to detect and quantify a circadian rhythm as a systematic daily variation, averaging towards zero the noise superimposed to the actual time series. Serial section analysis of the data, along all the experimental span, is useful to detect a) the reproducibility of the rhythm b) the variation of its parameters induced by changes in the experimental conditions c) the long-term trend. In the first subject the influence on the circadian rhythm of the pulse rate, temperature and blood pressure, due to a 4 h advancing shift in the rest-activity synchronizer, is well documented. In the first hypertensive patient a circadian rhythm is demonstrated also in blood pressure during two non-consecutive months. No difference is detected in both mesor and amplitude of blood pressure and a full resynchronization of the acrophase is achieved when a 1 h delaying shift in the rest activity synchronizer is imposed. In the second patient a well reproducible rhythm of systolic blood pressure and a low noise/signal ratio is documented by the serial section display. In the third patient the 'lability' of hypertention seems mainly due to salt sensitivity, as documented by the significant lowering of the mesor in the second experimental span, when a lowering of only 30 mEq/day in salt intake is imposed. The serial section better documents the salt-sensitivity of this patient, during a span when loading and depressing of salt intake is imposed. In the last patient the prompt effect of therapy in lowering blood pressure within normal range is well documented by serial section with 3 day interval. A possible effect of masking the circadian rhythm of blood pressure, due to therapy, is inferred by the serial section display with an interval of the same length (33 days) as the subspan without therapy. The possibility of prevention in the hypertensive disease is discussed, with the aim of autorhythmometry and statistical methods employed in this paper.     

Community care compared with hospital outpatient care for hypertensive patients.

Three hundred and seventy-six patients with treated diastolic blood pressures of less than 105 mm Hg and no history of accelerated hypertension or renal failure were selected from among those attending the Hammersmith Hospital hypertension clinic. Their average lying treated blood pressure was 146 mm Hg systolic and 90 mm Hg diastolic and average age 56 years; 18% were black, 6% Asian, and 76% white. The patients were mostly having multiple treatment, 90% receiving a diuretic, 35% methyldopa, 33% propranolol, 18% atenolol, 9% hydrallazine, and 7% bethanidine. They were randomly allocated to either two years of further hospital outpatient care or referred back to their general practitioners. During the two years 19 (10%) of the 187 patients followed up in hospital defaulted and three had their treatment discontinued. Twelve (6%) of the 189 followed up by their general practitioners defaulted from follow-up and nine had their treatment discontinued. At the end of the trial the average lying blood pressure was 148 mm Hg systolic and 88 mm Hg diastolic in the hospital group and 149 mm Hg systolic and 90 mm Hg diastolic in the general practice group. The change in blood pressure was calculated for each individual and showed an average fall of 1.6 mm Hg in standing diastolic pressure in the hospital group and a rise of 1.4 mm Hg in the general practice group (p less than 0.05). The 90% confidence limits for a difference in standing diastolic pressure between the groups were 1 and 5 mm Hg with the pressure lower in the hospital group. General practice care was not quite as effective in controlling blood pressure as continued specialist supervision over two years in this selected group of treated outpatients with mild or moderate hypertension, but these results show that the discharge back to general practitioners of patients who are well controlled after hospital treatment is a sensible policy.     

Is weight loss an effective treatment for hypertension? The evidence against

Although there are many studies reporting correlations between relative body weight and blood pressure, the correlations are generally of low order. Furthermore, these observational studies provide, at best, circumstantial evidence concerning the effect of weight reduction on elevated blood pressure. After outlining key methodologic criteria for testing the hypothesis that weight loss lowers blood pressure among hypertensive obese subjects, this article reviews the best intervention studies that are available. Despite the demonstration in these randomized trials that weight reduction programs can lower weight successfully, the results for blood pressure lowering are in considerable disagreement. Two studies reported significant lowering of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure, one found significant lowering of systolic pressure only, and two failed to find significant differences in either. The definitive study of substantial weight loss among patients receiving no other antihypertensive treatment or standardized medical treatment with long-term follow-up has yet to be done. At best, weight loss offers very limited benefit for overweight hypertensives. At worst, weight loss programs are expensive to run, cause considerable patient discomfort and may delay the implementation of more effective therapy.     

General practitioners' management of hypertension in elderly patients.

OBJECTIVE--To assess general practitioners'' attitudes to the diagnosis and management of hypertension in elderly patients. DESIGN--Postal questionnaire to all general practitioners in Leicestershire. RESULTS--360 of 451 general practitioners (80%) responded. 81% (292) reported rechecking an initially high blood pressure on two or three occasions before starting treatment, 56% (202) measured sitting blood pressure only, and just 28% (100) took sitting and standing levels. 36% (128) had no upper age limit for starting anti-hypertensive treatment; of the 58% (206) who did, the median was 80 (range 70-99) years. Blood pressure levels reported for starting treatment in patients aged 70-79 years were 180 (150-240)/106 (90-120) mm Hg. 34% of general practitioners (121) would not treat isolated systolic hypertension. The most popular first line treatment for an elderly hypertensive patient was a thiazide diuretic; only 17% of general practitioners (61) initially tried non-pharmacological methods. 34% (122) would continue anti-hypertensive treatment unchanged in the period immediately after stroke. CONCLUSIONS--The variation among general practitioners in the criteria for the measurement, diagnosis, and treatment of hypertension in elderly patients emphasises the need for clear management guidelines in this age group.     

Is exercise good for high blood pressure?

Ten men with uncomplicated essential hypertension (mean standing blood pressure 165/109 mm Hg) and 10 normal controls matched for age and weight were studied for the hypotensive potential of moderate exercise. Tests were conducted on a treadmill set to induce a steady heart rate of 120 beats/min and performed over five 10-minute periods separated by three minutes'' rest and finishing with 30 minutes'' sitting quietly in a chair.During exercise the mean systolic pressures were identical in the hypertensive patients and controls (175±SEM 5 mm Hg), the controls therefore sustaining an appreciably greater increase in pressure. During the 30-minute rest period after the tests both the control and hypertensive groups showed a significant and sustained fall in absolute systolic pressures as compared with pre-exercise values (p <0·001), the mean percentage reductions being 22% and 25% respectively.If a fall in blood pressure after exercise is maintained for four to 10 hours, then a “good walk” twice a day might be reasonable treatment for mild hypertension. Studies are continuing to determine the amount of exercise needed and the duration for which the reduction in blood pressure is maintained.     

Factors related to first dose hypotensive effect of captopril: prediction and treatment.

The blood pressure response to the first dose of captopril (6.25 mg, 12.5 mg, or 25 mg) was measured in 65 treated, severely hypertensive patients. Mean supine blood pressure was 187/108 mm Hg immediately before captopril was given. Twenty one patients experienced a fall in supine systolic pressure greater than 50 mm Hg, including five whose pressure fell more than 100 mm Hg and two whose pressure fell more than 150 mm Hg. Six patients developed symptoms of acute hypotension, including dizziness, stupor, dysphasia, and hemiparesis. Percentage reductions in blood pressure were greatest in those with secondary hypertension (p less than 0.05), high pretreatment blood pressure (p less than 0.05), and high concentrations of plasma renin and angiotensin II (p less than 0.01). No significant correlation was found between fall in blood pressure and serum sodium concentration, age, renal function, and the dose of captopril given. A severe first dose effect cannot be consistently predicted in individual patients who have received other antihypertensive drugs for severe hypertension. Such patients should have close medical supervision for at least three hours after the first dose of captopril.     

Obesity as a determinant for response to antihypertensive treatment.

OBJECTIVE--To test the hypothesis that beta blockers lower blood pressure more effectively than calcium entry blockers in obese hypertensive patients and that calcium entry blockers are more effective in lean patients. DESIGN--Double blind, randomised controlled trial of treatment over six weeks. SETTING--Tertiary referral centre. SUBJECTS--42 white men with uncomplicated mild to moderate essential hypertension (World Health Organisation stage I or II); 36 completed the study. INTERVENTION--Patients were randomised to metoprolol 50-100 mg twice daily or isradipine 2.5-5.0 mg twice daily for six weeks after a two week run in phase. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE--Blood pressure after six weeks of treatment. RESULTS--When stratified according to treatment and presence of obesity (body mass index < or = 27 kg/m2), the mean (SD) fall in blood pressure in the beta blocker group was 24 (13)/18 (10) mm Hg in obese patients and 18 (19)/12 (13) mm Hg in lean patients. In the calcium entry blocker group, the fall in blood pressure was 21 (15)/17 (6) mm Hg in lean patients and 18 (11)/8 (10) mm Hg in obese patients. After taking age and blood pressure before treatment into account there was a significant interaction between obesity and drug therapy (p = 0.019) with a better diastolic blood pressure response to calcium entry blockers in lean patients and to beta blockers in obese hypertensive patients. CONCLUSION--Obesity affects the efficacy of metoprolol and isradipine in reducing blood pressure.     

Implementation of shared decision making by physician training to optimise hypertension treatment. Study protocol of a cluster-RCT

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Hypertension is one of the key factors causing cardiovascular diseases which make up the most frequent cause of death in industrialised nations. However about 60% of hypertensive patients in Germany treated with antihypertensives do not reach the recommended target blood pressure. The involvement of patients in medical decision making fulfils not only an ethical imperative but, furthermore, has the potential of higher treatment success. One concept to enhance the active role of patients is shared decision making. Until now there exists little information on the effects of shared decision making trainings for general practitioners on patient participation and on lowering blood pressure in hypertensive patients. METHODS: In a cluster-randomised controlled trial 1800 patients receiving antihypertensives will be screened with 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in their general practitioners' practices. Only patients who have not reached their blood pressure target (approximately 1200) will remain in the study (T1 -- T3). General practitioners of the intervention group will take part in a shared decision making-training after baseline assessment (T0). General practitioners of the control group will treat their patients as usual. Primary endpoints are change of systolic blood pressure and change of patients' perceived participation. Secondary endpoints are changes of diastolic blood pressure, knowledge, medical adherence and cardiovascular risk. Data analysis will be performed with mixed effects models. DISCUSSION: The hypothesis underlying this study is that shared decision making, realised by a shared decision making training for general practitioners, activates patients, facilitates patients' empowerment and contributes to a better hypertension control. This study is the first one that tests this hypothesis with a (cluster-) randomised trial and a large sample size.Trial registrationWHO International Clinical Trials: http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial.aspx?TrialID=DRKS00000125.