PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 12, 1999Archives of Internal Medicine53 citations

Physical Symptoms Distress Index

View Full Paper
RARichard B. AndersonNHNorman K. HollenbergGWGordon H. Williams

Structured PICO

Does controlled onset, extended release verapamil improve physical symptom distress and quality of life compared to nifedipine in patients with stages 1 to 3 hypertension?

P
Population
528 men and women between 21 and 80 years of age with stages 1 to 3 hypertension.
I
Intervention
Verapamil (controlled onset, extended release) 180 to 480 mg for 10 weeks.
C
Comparator
Nifedipine (gastrointestinal therapeutic system) 30 to 120 mg/d for 10 weeks.
O
Outcome
Psychological well-being and physical symptom distress index assessed after 10 weeks of treatment.patient reported

Controlled onset, extended release verapamil is associated with significantly less physical symptom distress than nifedipine GITS in patients with hypertension, highlighting the utility of patient-assessed distress indices in evaluating tolerability.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether the degree of stress associated with adverse physical side effects correlates with overall quality of life (QOL) and compliance rates. To determine if instruments used to assess QOL can detect differences between treatments that have no known central nervous system effects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, parallel group study evaluated 180 to 480 mg of controlled onset, extended release (COER)-verapamil (n = 259) or 30 to 120 mg/d of nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) (n = 269) in men and women between 21 and 80 years of age with stages 1 to 3 hypertension. A battery of questions evaluating psychological well-being and a physical symptom distress index was administered after a 4-week placebo washout (baseline) and after 10 weeks of treatment or at dropout. RESULTS: Both treatments effectively lowered blood pressure, and there were no significant between-group differences in psychosocial QOL. A difference in the level of physical symptom distress was detected between treatments (P = .002; multivariate analysis of variance), with 7 significant univariate treatment effects, all favoring COER-verapamil, being noted-pedal edema, polyuria, rapid heart beat or palpitations, hives, muscle cramps, abdominal cramps, and headaches. Constipation-related distress increased significantly (P = .001) but to a similar extent with both treatments. The difference in symptom distress tended to predict compliance as there were more withdrawals in the nifedipine GITS group (n = 85) vs COER-verapamil group (n = 64) (P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Patient-assessed physical symptom distress is a sensitive, simple technique to evaluate the effect of antihypertensive medications on QOL and tolerability, as shown by its ability to detect the improvement associated with COER-verapamil. Depending on the agents involved, the Physical Symptom Distress Index may more closely predict dropout rates than the traditional psychosocial instruments, as suggested by the lower dropout rate in the COER-verapamil group. Thus, in studying treatment effects on QOL, both the distress of physical symptoms and the impact of psychosocial factors should be evaluated.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Anderson et al. (1999) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1c4b3701af05bf0da92daahttps://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.159.7.693
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper