corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 11856

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Okechukwu I, Mahmud A, Bennett K, Feely J.
Choice of first antihypertensive - are existing guidelines ignored?
Br J Clin Pharmacol 2007 Oct 22;
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2007.03005.x


Abstract:

What is already known about this subject

  • Recommended treatment guidelines for hypertension have been developed to assist GPs’ decisions about appropriate therapies.
  • The British Hypertension Society’s (BHS) 2004 guidelines recommend initial drug choice based on age, and avoidance of beta-adrenoceptor blockers in diabetes.

What this study adds

  • Prescribing of first-line antihypertensives in Ireland appears guided by age, but mainly for those under 55 years.
  • Adherence to the guidelines was in part related to patient gender.
  • Presence of concomitant diabetes had a greater influence on the choice of therapy than age of patient.

Aims To determine adherence to hypertension guidelines in relation to age and diabetes.

Methods The Irish HSE-PCRS prescribing database identified patients initiating antihypertensive monotherapy in 2005. Logistic regression predicted the likelihood of therapy according to guidelines.

Results The odds ratio (OR) of receiving therapies according to the guideline recommendations in those <55 years vs. >/=55 years was 1.31 (95% CI 1.26, 1.37). Diabetics were more likely than nondiabetics to receive antihypertensives other than beta-adrenoceptor blockers (OR 2.97, 95% CI 2.74, 3.21).

Conclusions Our findings show some adherence to the guidelines in relation to age but selective prescribing of antihypertensives for diabetics.

E-mail: okechuki@tcd.i.e

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963