Key result
Patients initiated on fixed-dose combinations had significantly higher risk-adjusted rates of attaining blood pressure goals (57.2%) compared to free-equivalent combinations (42.5%) or monotherapy (44.9%).
Why the study?
Does the initiation of fixed-dose combinations or specific antihypertensive classes improve blood pressure control compared to free-equivalent combinations or other monotherapies in primary care patients?
Observational (n=8,676)
Yes
Does the initiation of fixed-dose combinations or specific antihypertensive classes improve blood pressure control compared to free-equivalent combinations or other monotherapies in primary care patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 57.2% vs 42.5%
p-value: p=<0.001
Initiating antihypertensive therapy with fixed-dose combinations provides superior blood pressure reduction and goal attainment compared to free-equivalent combinations or monotherapy in primary care.
May support fixed-dose combinations for BP control in primary care; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: Few comparative effectiveness studies of treatment strategies using antihypertensive therapeutic classes in hypertension control have been assessed in a primary care environment. The objectives are to compare the effectiveness of common antihypertensive therapeutic classes initiated as monotherapy and of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs), free-equivalent combinations (FECs), and monotherapy on hypertension control. METHODS: This article reports observational comparative effectiveness analyses of data electronically extracted from electronic health records. The study population consisted of 8,676 patients with an incident prescription for an antihypertensive agent of a total of 79,176 patients receiving antihypertensive therapy in 33 geographically diverse primary care clinics. The main measures were reductions in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and rates of attaining goals per the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC7). RESULTS: There were small, clinically insignificant differences in blood pressure reductions between the monotherapy classes. Higher rates of blood pressure control were obtained when patients were initiated on an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor than a thiazide or thiazide-like diuretic (47.8% vs 39.9%) or a β-blocker versus a thiazide (45.9% vs 39.9%). Patients initiated on FDCs had significantly larger reductions in blood pressure than patients initiated on FECs (-17.3 vs -12.0 mm Hg SBP; -10.1 vs -6.0 mm Hg DBP) or monotherapy (-17.3 vs -13.6 mm Hg SBP; -10.1 vs -7.9 mm Hg DBP). Rates of attaining JNC7 goals also were better for FDCs than FECs (57.2% vs 42.5%) and for FDCs versus monotherapy (57.2% vs 44.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients initiated on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and β-blockers had slightly higher rates of blood pressure control. The use of FDCs as initial therapy is more effective in the control of hypertension than monotherapy or FECs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bronsert et al. (2013) conducted an observational in Hypertension (n=8,676). Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) vs. Free-equivalent combinations (FECs) or monotherapy was evaluated on Attainment of JNC7 blood pressure goals (risk-adjusted) (p=<0.001). Patients initiated on fixed-dose combinations had significantly higher risk-adjusted rates of attaining blood pressure goals (57.2%) compared to free-equivalent combinations (42.5%) or monotherapy (44.9%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: