Why the study?
Does ivabradine improve quality of life compared to beta-blockers in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris?
Does ivabradine improve quality of life compared to beta-blockers in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris?
Ivabradine improves all aspects of quality of life and provides greater heart rate reduction compared to beta-blockers in patients with chronic stable angina.
Supports ivabradine consideration for QOL-focused stable angina care; extends RCT evidence on patient-reported benefits versus beta-blockers.
No published studies have evaluated quality of life (QOL) with the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) in subjects with chronic stable angina pectoris (CSAP). We evaluated whether a 1-month treatment with 10 mg ivabradine (IVA) or β-blockers (bisoprolol 2.5 mg/day, carvedilol 12.5 mg/day, atenolol 50 mg/day) improves the QOL in patients with CSAP. The SF-36 was administered to 238 patients randomized in two groups. QOL and heart rate (HR) results after 1 month of therapy with IVA and β-blockers (T1) were compared with basal values (T0). Treatments in both groups significantly reduced HR (-11 bpm at T1 compared with T0 in the IVA group, -7 bpm at T1 compared with T0 in the β-blocker group), but IVA demonstrated a more significant (p < 0.001) reduction in HR than β-blocker treatment (p < 0.01). We observed a significant improvement in all QOL dimensions in the group treated with IVA, in particular in the sections regarding physical functioning, physical role, and general health (p < 0.001). In the group treated with β-blockers, we found statistically significant improvement only in the physical functioning and physical role sections (p < 0.01). With β-blocker treatment, many questionnaire sections showed no statistically significant improvement (body pain, social functioning, emotional role, and mental component summary). IVA treatment significantly improves all aspects of QOL in patients with CSAP, unlike β-blocker treatment. This improvement is associated with a greater reduction in HR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Riccioni et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: