Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi S, Rasmusen M, Pekkarinen T, Pitkäjärvi T, Romo M, Takala J
Department of Public Health Science and General Practice, University of Oulu, Finland.
Arzneimittelforschung. 1997 Feb;47(2):144-50.
The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of three treatment methods available for treatment of previously medicated patients with mild to moderate hypertension. The comparison was made between adjusting or increasing previous medication and switching the previous drug treatment to lisinopril (CAS 76547-98-3) or lisinopril hydrochlorothiazide (CAS 58-93-5) therapy and in both of these treatment groups the effect of additional intensified health education was tested. An open, randomised, controlled multi-centre study lasting 36 weeks involving 189 doctors and 69 nurses was carried out in 155 centres of primary health care and occupational health care system in Finland. The study population consisted of 1156 patients, age 30-70 years, (mean DBP 95-115 mmHg in the last three to five measurements during follow-up). The number of patients achieving target pressure (DBP < 90 mmHg) at the end of the study, defined daily doses (DDD) of antihypertensive drugs and side-effects in different treatment groups were regarded as the main outcome measures of the study. After exclusions and drop-outs the final analysis was carried out with 900 patients, 419 women (46.6%) and 481 men (53.4%). Patients receiving lisinopril treatment achieved target pressure significantly more often (p < 0.001) than those continuing their previous or adjusted medication at 36 weeks (59.2 and 55.5% vs 40.3 and 42.7%). Only a small additional but statistically non-significant blood pressure lowering effect was achieved with intensified non-pharmacological treatment at weeks 12 and 24, but this difference had disappeared at week 36. The mean DDDs of different antihypertensive drugs did not differ between groups except for female patients on previous or adjusted medication not receiving health education, the mean DDD being significantly (p < 0.05) higher at weeks 24 and 36 in this group. The profile of adverse effects at the end of the study clearly favoured patients on lisinopril treatment except for cough which was reported in 18% of patients vs 10% in the control groups. 81 patients on lisinopril treatment were withdrawn from the study because of cough. The results showed that hypertensive patients with poor treatment control benefit from all three approaches. A greater proportion of patients on lisinopril treatment achieved target pressure and also experienced fewer side effects than those continuing on adjusted previous medication. Intensified personal health education given once a month during six months had only a small additional beneficial effect on reaching the target pressure and this effect was lost in three months after the health education period.
本研究的目的是比较三种治疗方法对既往接受过药物治疗的轻至中度高血压患者的疗效。比较了调整或增加既往用药与将既往药物治疗换用赖诺普利(CAS 76547-98-3)或赖诺普利氢氯噻嗪(CAS 58-93-5)治疗的效果,并且在这两个治疗组中都测试了额外强化健康教育的效果。在芬兰的155个初级卫生保健和职业卫生保健系统中心开展了一项开放、随机、对照的多中心研究,为期36周,涉及189名医生和69名护士。研究人群包括1156例年龄在30至70岁之间的患者(随访期间最近三至五次测量的平均舒张压为95-115 mmHg)。研究的主要结局指标为研究结束时达到目标血压(舒张压<90 mmHg)的患者数量、不同治疗组抗高血压药物的规定日剂量(DDD)以及副作用。在排除和退出研究的患者之后,最终对900例患者进行了分析,其中419例为女性(46.6%),481例为男性(53.4%)。接受赖诺普利治疗的患者在36周时达到目标血压的比例显著高于继续使用既往药物或调整用药的患者(分别为59.2%和55.5%,对比40.3%和42.7%,p<0.001)。在第12周和第24周时,强化非药物治疗仅产生了微小的额外降压效果,但在统计学上无显著意义,且这种差异在第36周时消失。除了未接受健康教育的既往接受过药物治疗或调整用药的女性患者外,不同抗高血压药物的平均DDD在各组之间没有差异,该组在第24周和第36周时的平均DDD显著更高(p<0.05)。研究结束时的不良反应情况明显有利于接受赖诺普利治疗的患者,但咳嗽除外,接受赖诺普利治疗的患者中有18%报告有咳嗽,而对照组为10%。81例接受赖诺普利治疗的患者因咳嗽退出研究。结果表明,治疗控制不佳的高血压患者从所有三种治疗方法中均能获益。与继续使用调整后的既往药物治疗的患者相比,接受赖诺普利治疗的患者达到目标血压的比例更高,且副作用更少。在六个月内每月进行一次强化个人健康教育对达到目标血压仅产生了微小的额外有益效果,且这种效果在健康教育期结束三个月后消失。