• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

生活方式改善计划与使用普萘洛尔治疗舒张期高血压的比较。

Comparison of a lifestyle modification program with propranolol use in the management of diastolic hypertension.

作者信息

Pérez-Stable E J, Coates T J, Baron R B, Biró B S, Hauck W W, McHenry K S, Gardiner P S, Feigal D

机构信息

Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, USA.

出版信息

J Gen Intern Med. 1995 Aug;10(8):419-28. doi: 10.1007/BF02599912.

DOI:10.1007/BF02599912
PMID:7472698
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the management of mild diastolic hypertension (90 to 104 mm Hg) using a nonpharmacologic intervention with that using propranolol or placebo.

DESIGN

Randomized, placebo-controlled trial with a 2 x 2 factorial design.

SETTING

University-based ambulatory care center.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred seven men and 105 women, 22 to 59 years of age, 73% white, who had mild diastolic hypertension untreated for at least eight weeks.

INTERVENTIONS

  1. a multicomponent lifestyle modification intervention (lifestyle focus group, or LFG) administered in eight weekly meetings + placebo, 2) LFG + propranolol, 3) propranolol alone, and 4) placebo alone, followed for 12 months.

MEASUREMENTS

Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and self-reported adverse effects at each of nine follow-up visits; fasting total cholesterol, triglycerides, and glucose at baseline and 12 months; 24-hour urine sodium (Na+) and potassium (K+), three-day food records and physical activity questionnaire at three and 12 months; and a quality of life questionnaire at 12 months.

MAIN RESULTS

The mean decreases in DBP at 12 months were: 8.5 mm Hg in the LFG + propranolol group; 7.7 mm Hg in the propranolol-only group; 5.9 mm Hg in the placebo-only group; and 5.4 mm Hg in the LFG + placebo group. Repeated-measures analysis of covariance showed that level of baseline DBP (p < 0.0001), time of follow-up (p < 0.0001), and propranolol use (p < 0.0001) were significantly associated with a decrease in DBP at 12 months. Despite reductions in urinary Na+ (-35 mEq; 95% CI = -50, -19), dietary Na+ (-521 mg; 95% CI = -710, -332), total calories ingested (-238; 95% CI = -335, -140), and weight (-1.4 lb; 95% CI = -3.7, +0.8), and significant increases in dietary K+ (+294 mg; 95% CI = +107, +480) and in mets-minutes of exercise (+43; 95% CI = +20, +67) at three months, assignment to the LFG intervention had no effect on DBP at three or 12 months. The subjects assigned to take propranolol more frequently reported fatigue during ordinary activities, sleep disturbance, decrease in sexual activity, and depressed feelings, when compared with the subjects taking placebo, but the numbers of study withdrawals did not differ by drug assignment. No significant difference in total cholesterol and glucose levels was observed by group assignment. Triglycerides increased significantly in the subjects assigned to propranolol (mean difference = +20 mg/dL; 95% CI of difference +1.5, +39). There was no difference in the responses to 21 quality of life items between the subjects assigned to propranolol and those assigned to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

This multicomponent lifestyle modification intervention was unable to promote persistent behavior changes and thus was inferior to propranolol therapy for the treatment for mild diastolic hypertension. Future research should focus on single modifiable factors to lower blood pressure.

摘要

目的

比较使用非药物干预、普萘洛尔或安慰剂治疗轻度舒张期高血压(90至104毫米汞柱)的效果。

设计

采用2×2析因设计的随机、安慰剂对照试验。

地点

大学附属医院门诊护理中心。

参与者

207名男性和105名女性,年龄在22至59岁之间,73%为白人,患有轻度舒张期高血压且至少八周未接受治疗。

干预措施

1)在八次每周一次的会议中进行多组分生活方式改善干预(生活方式焦点小组,简称LFG)+安慰剂;2)LFG+普萘洛尔;3)单独使用普萘洛尔;4)单独使用安慰剂,随访12个月。

测量指标

在九次随访中的每次随访时测量收缩压(SBP)、舒张压(DBP)和自我报告的不良反应;在基线和12个月时测量空腹总胆固醇、甘油三酯和血糖;在3个月和12个月时测量24小时尿钠(Na+)和钾(K+)、三天食物记录和身体活动问卷;在12个月时测量生活质量问卷。

主要结果

12个月时DBP的平均下降幅度分别为:LFG+普萘洛尔组8.5毫米汞柱;单独使用普萘洛尔组7.7毫米汞柱;单独使用安慰剂组5.9毫米汞柱;LFG+安慰剂组5.4毫米汞柱。重复测量协方差分析显示,基线DBP水平(p<0.0001)、随访时间(p<0.0001)和使用普萘洛尔(p<0.0001)与12个月时DBP的下降显著相关。尽管在3个月时尿Na+减少(-35毫当量;95%置信区间=-50,-19)、饮食中Na+减少(-521毫克;95%置信区间=-710,-332)、摄入的总热量减少(-238;95%置信区间=-335,-140)以及体重减轻(-1.4磅;95%置信区间=-3.7,+0.8),且饮食中K+显著增加(+294毫克;95%置信区间=+107,+480)以及运动代谢分钟数显著增加(+43;95%置信区间=+20,+67),但分配到LFG干预组在3个月或12个月时对DBP没有影响。与服用安慰剂的受试者相比,分配服用普萘洛尔的受试者更频繁地报告在日常活动中疲劳、睡眠障碍、性活动减少和情绪低落,但因药物分配导致的研究退出人数没有差异。按组分配观察到总胆固醇和血糖水平无显著差异。分配到普萘洛尔组的受试者甘油三酯显著升高(平均差异=+20毫克/分升;差异的95%置信区间为+1.5,+39)。分配到普萘洛尔组的受试者与分配到安慰剂组的受试者在21项生活质量项目的反应上没有差异。

结论

这种多组分生活方式改善干预未能促进持续的行为改变,因此在治疗轻度舒张期高血压方面不如普萘洛尔治疗。未来的研究应侧重于单一可改变因素以降低血压。

相似文献

1
Comparison of a lifestyle modification program with propranolol use in the management of diastolic hypertension.生活方式改善计划与使用普萘洛尔治疗舒张期高血压的比较。
J Gen Intern Med. 1995 Aug;10(8):419-28. doi: 10.1007/BF02599912.
2
3
Blood pressure reactivity in the evaluation of resting blood pressure and mood responses to pindolol and propranolol in hypertensive patients.高血压患者静息血压评估中的血压反应性以及对吲哚洛尔和普萘洛尔的情绪反应
Heart Lung. 1993 Sep-Oct;22(5):383-91.
4
5
The effects of propranolol on cognitive function and quality of life: a randomized trial among patients with diastolic hypertension.普萘洛尔对认知功能和生活质量的影响:一项针对舒张期高血压患者的随机试验。
Am J Med. 2000 Apr 1;108(5):359-65. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(00)00304-1.
6
Renin predicts diastolic blood pressure response to nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic therapy.肾素可预测非药物和药物治疗对舒张压的反应。
JAMA. 1992 Mar 4;267(9):1221-5.
7
Manidipine versus enalapril monotherapy in patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, 24-week study.马尼地平与依那普利单药治疗高血压合并2型糖尿病患者的多中心、随机、双盲、24周研究。
Clin Ther. 2005 Feb;27(2):166-73. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2005.02.001.
8
Phase I, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study of the effects on blood pressure of abrupt cessation versus taper down of guanfacine extended-release tablets in adults aged 19 to 24 years.一项针对19至24岁成年人的1期双盲随机安慰剂对照剂量递增研究,该研究旨在比较突然停用与逐渐减量胍法辛缓释片对血压的影响。
Clin Ther. 2007 Sep;29(9):1967-79. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.09.020.
9
The effects of nonpharmacologic interventions on blood pressure of persons with high normal levels. Results of the Trials of Hypertension Prevention, Phase I.非药物干预对血压正常高值人群血压的影响。高血压预防试验一期结果。
JAMA. 1992 Mar 4;267(9):1213-20. doi: 10.1001/jama.1992.03480090061028.
10
Addition of Propranolol in Resistant Arterial hypertension Treatment (APROPRIATE study): study protocol for a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial.普萘洛尔用于难治性动脉高血压治疗的添加治疗(APROPRIATE研究):一项随机双盲安慰剂对照试验的研究方案
Trials. 2017 Mar 14;18(1):124. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-1863-1.

引用本文的文献

1
Adverse effects of common medications on male fertility.常见药物对男性生育力的不良影响。
Nat Rev Urol. 2015 Jul;12(7):401-13. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2015.145. Epub 2015 Jun 23.
2
Multiple risk factor interventions for primary prevention of coronary heart disease.用于冠心病一级预防的多重危险因素干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jan 19;2011(1):CD001561. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001561.pub3.
3
Multiple risk factor interventions for primary prevention of coronary heart disease.用于冠心病一级预防的多重危险因素干预措施。

本文引用的文献

1
Antihypertensive therapy--efficacy and quality of life.抗高血压治疗——疗效与生活质量。
N Engl J Med. 1993 Apr 1;328(13):959-61. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199304013281311.
2
Quality of life and antihypertensive therapy in men. A comparison of captopril with enalapril. The Quality-of-Life Hypertension Study Group.男性的生活质量与抗高血压治疗。卡托普利与依那普利的比较。生活质量高血压研究组。
N Engl J Med. 1993 Apr 1;328(13):907-13. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199304013281302.
3
The fifth report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC V).
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Oct 18(4):CD001561. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001561.pub2.
4
Effects of exercise, diet and weight loss on high blood pressure.运动、饮食及体重减轻对高血压的影响。
Sports Med. 2004;34(5):307-16. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200434050-00003.
5
Individualised multifactorial lifestyle intervention trial for high-risk cardiovascular patients in primary care.针对基层医疗中高危心血管疾病患者的个体化多因素生活方式干预试验。
Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Apr;51(465):291-4.
6
Health-related quality-of-life measurement in hypertension. A review of randomised controlled drug trials.高血压患者健康相关生活质量的测量:随机对照药物试验综述
Pharmacoeconomics. 2000 Nov;18(5):435-50. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200018050-00003.
7
New paradigms for disease management.疾病管理的新范式
J Gen Intern Med. 1996 Jan;11(1):63-4. doi: 10.1007/BF02603496.
8
Disease management needs new paradigms.疾病管理需要新的范式。
J Gen Intern Med. 1995 Aug;10(8):472-3. doi: 10.1007/BF02599924.
全国高血压检测、评估与治疗联合委员会第五次报告(JNC V)
Arch Intern Med. 1993 Jan 25;153(2):154-83.
4
Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study. Final results. Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study Research Group.轻度高血压治疗研究。最终结果。轻度高血压治疗研究组
JAMA. 1993 Aug 11;270(6):713-24.
5
Blood pressure management: individualized treatment based on absolute risk and the potential for benefit.血压管理:基于绝对风险和潜在获益的个体化治疗。
Ann Intern Med. 1993 Aug 15;119(4):329-35. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-119-4-199308150-00013.
6
Hypertension in the elderly. Implications and generalizability of randomized trials.老年人高血压。随机试验的意义及普遍性
JAMA. 1994 Dec 28;272(24):1932-8.
7
Drug treatment of hypertension in the elderly: a meta-analysis.老年人高血压的药物治疗:一项荟萃分析。
Ann Intern Med. 1994 Sep 1;121(5):355-62. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-121-5-199409010-00008.
8
The effect of hypotensive drugs on the quality of life.降压药物对生活质量的影响。
J R Coll Gen Pract. 1982 Feb;32(235):103-5.
9
Treatment of mild hypertension: a five year controlled drug trial. The Oslo study.轻度高血压的治疗:一项为期五年的对照药物试验。奥斯陆研究。
Am J Med. 1980 Nov;69(5):725-32. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(80)90438-6.
10
Comparison of propranolol and hydrochlorothiazide for thr initial treatment of hypertension. I. Results of short-term titration with emphasis on racial differences in response. Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive agents.普萘洛尔与氢氯噻嗪用于高血压初始治疗的比较。I. 短期滴定结果,重点关注反应中的种族差异。退伍军人管理局抗高血压药物合作研究组。
JAMA. 1982 Oct 22;248(16):1996-2003.