Comparison of efficacy and adverse drug reactions of monotherapy versus combination therapy of antihypertensives among diabetic hypertensive patients in a tertiary care hospital

R. M. Paulose, Laxminarayana Kurady Bairy, M. M. Prabhu, B. R. Eesha, Veena Nayak, Amruta Tripathy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse drug reactions of monotherapy and combination therapy of antihypertensive drugs in diabetic hypertensive patients. Methods: A prospective observational study of 18 months duration was conducted in the Department of Medicine of a tertiary care hospital in South India. A total of 200 patients were included in the study. Using a standard proforma, the details of patients such as demographic data and antihypertensive medications were collected and analyzed for efficacy and safety. Results: Of 200 patients studied, 50% received monotherapy whereas the remaining 50% received combination therapy. There was male preponderance (54%) in the study population, with the mean age being 60.07±11.32 years. In monotherapy group, most commonly prescribed drug was amlodipine (38%), whereas in combination group, angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) or calcium channel blocker (CCB) + beta blocker (18%) was commonly prescribed among 2-drug group and ARB+ thiazide+ CCB (25.6%) among 3-drug group. Monotherapy and combination therapy were analyzed to be equally efficacious in reducing systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure. Based on the adverse effect profile, monotherapy comparatively produced more adverse effects than combination group. Amlodipine-induced pedal edema (56.7%) was the most common adverse effect observed, and it was predominantly managed by changing it to be a better tolerable CCB, namely cilnidipine. Conclusion: The combination therapy may be a better treatment option in selected patient population.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)385-391
Number of pages7
JournalAsian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research
Volume10
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-02-2017

Fingerprint

Tertiary Healthcare
Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
Tertiary Care Centers
Antihypertensive Agents
Calcium Channel Blockers
Blood Pressure
Amlodipine
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists
Thiazides
Drug Receptors
Therapeutics
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Population
Observational Studies
Foot
India
Edema
Medicine
Demography
Prospective Studies

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pharmacology
  • Pharmaceutical Science
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

@article{8af71f55c3d143aa8a610f977120ced5,
title = "Comparison of efficacy and adverse drug reactions of monotherapy versus combination therapy of antihypertensives among diabetic hypertensive patients in a tertiary care hospital",
abstract = "Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse drug reactions of monotherapy and combination therapy of antihypertensive drugs in diabetic hypertensive patients. Methods: A prospective observational study of 18 months duration was conducted in the Department of Medicine of a tertiary care hospital in South India. A total of 200 patients were included in the study. Using a standard proforma, the details of patients such as demographic data and antihypertensive medications were collected and analyzed for efficacy and safety. Results: Of 200 patients studied, 50{\%} received monotherapy whereas the remaining 50{\%} received combination therapy. There was male preponderance (54{\%}) in the study population, with the mean age being 60.07±11.32 years. In monotherapy group, most commonly prescribed drug was amlodipine (38{\%}), whereas in combination group, angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) or calcium channel blocker (CCB) + beta blocker (18{\%}) was commonly prescribed among 2-drug group and ARB+ thiazide+ CCB (25.6{\%}) among 3-drug group. Monotherapy and combination therapy were analyzed to be equally efficacious in reducing systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure. Based on the adverse effect profile, monotherapy comparatively produced more adverse effects than combination group. Amlodipine-induced pedal edema (56.7{\%}) was the most common adverse effect observed, and it was predominantly managed by changing it to be a better tolerable CCB, namely cilnidipine. Conclusion: The combination therapy may be a better treatment option in selected patient population.",
author = "Paulose, {R. M.} and Bairy, {Laxminarayana Kurady} and Prabhu, {M. M.} and Eesha, {B. R.} and Veena Nayak and Amruta Tripathy",
year = "2017",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.22159/ajpcr.2017.v10i2.15854",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "385--391",
journal = "Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research",
issn = "0974-2441",
publisher = "Innovare Academics Sciences Pvt. Ltd",
number = "2",

}

Comparison of efficacy and adverse drug reactions of monotherapy versus combination therapy of antihypertensives among diabetic hypertensive patients in a tertiary care hospital. / Paulose, R. M.; Bairy, Laxminarayana Kurady; Prabhu, M. M.; Eesha, B. R.; Nayak, Veena; Tripathy, Amruta.

In: Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, Vol. 10, No. 2, 01.02.2017, p. 385-391.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of efficacy and adverse drug reactions of monotherapy versus combination therapy of antihypertensives among diabetic hypertensive patients in a tertiary care hospital

AU - Paulose, R. M.

AU - Bairy, Laxminarayana Kurady

AU - Prabhu, M. M.

AU - Eesha, B. R.

AU - Nayak, Veena

AU - Tripathy, Amruta

PY - 2017/2/1

Y1 - 2017/2/1

N2 - Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse drug reactions of monotherapy and combination therapy of antihypertensive drugs in diabetic hypertensive patients. Methods: A prospective observational study of 18 months duration was conducted in the Department of Medicine of a tertiary care hospital in South India. A total of 200 patients were included in the study. Using a standard proforma, the details of patients such as demographic data and antihypertensive medications were collected and analyzed for efficacy and safety. Results: Of 200 patients studied, 50% received monotherapy whereas the remaining 50% received combination therapy. There was male preponderance (54%) in the study population, with the mean age being 60.07±11.32 years. In monotherapy group, most commonly prescribed drug was amlodipine (38%), whereas in combination group, angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) or calcium channel blocker (CCB) + beta blocker (18%) was commonly prescribed among 2-drug group and ARB+ thiazide+ CCB (25.6%) among 3-drug group. Monotherapy and combination therapy were analyzed to be equally efficacious in reducing systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure. Based on the adverse effect profile, monotherapy comparatively produced more adverse effects than combination group. Amlodipine-induced pedal edema (56.7%) was the most common adverse effect observed, and it was predominantly managed by changing it to be a better tolerable CCB, namely cilnidipine. Conclusion: The combination therapy may be a better treatment option in selected patient population.

AB - Objective: To compare the efficacy and adverse drug reactions of monotherapy and combination therapy of antihypertensive drugs in diabetic hypertensive patients. Methods: A prospective observational study of 18 months duration was conducted in the Department of Medicine of a tertiary care hospital in South India. A total of 200 patients were included in the study. Using a standard proforma, the details of patients such as demographic data and antihypertensive medications were collected and analyzed for efficacy and safety. Results: Of 200 patients studied, 50% received monotherapy whereas the remaining 50% received combination therapy. There was male preponderance (54%) in the study population, with the mean age being 60.07±11.32 years. In monotherapy group, most commonly prescribed drug was amlodipine (38%), whereas in combination group, angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) or calcium channel blocker (CCB) + beta blocker (18%) was commonly prescribed among 2-drug group and ARB+ thiazide+ CCB (25.6%) among 3-drug group. Monotherapy and combination therapy were analyzed to be equally efficacious in reducing systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure. Based on the adverse effect profile, monotherapy comparatively produced more adverse effects than combination group. Amlodipine-induced pedal edema (56.7%) was the most common adverse effect observed, and it was predominantly managed by changing it to be a better tolerable CCB, namely cilnidipine. Conclusion: The combination therapy may be a better treatment option in selected patient population.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011977893&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85011977893&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.22159/ajpcr.2017.v10i2.15854

DO - 10.22159/ajpcr.2017.v10i2.15854

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85011977893

VL - 10

SP - 385

EP - 391

JO - Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research

JF - Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research

SN - 0974-2441

IS - 2

ER -