Influences of educational interventions and adverse news about calcium-channel blockers on first-line prescribing of antihypertensive drugs to elderly people in British Columbia. Randomised trial of effects of calcium antagonists compared with diuretics and beta-blockers on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Nordic Diltiazem (NORDIL) study. Morbidity and mortality in patients randomised to double-blind treatment with a long-acting calcium-channel blocker or diuretic in the International Nifedipine GITS study: Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension Treatment (INSIGHT). Beta-blockers versus diuretics in hypertensive men: main results from the HAPPHY trial. Thiazide treatment for calcium urolithiasis in patients with idiopathic hypercalciuria. Thiazide diuretic agents and the incidence of hip fracture. Randomized prospective study of a nonthiazide diuretic, indapamide, in preventing calcium stone recurrences. A computerized intervention to decrease the use of calcium channel blockers in hypertension. A randomized trial of the angiotensin-receptor blocker valsartan in chronic heart failure. Quality of care for secondary prevention for patients with coronary heart disease: results of the Hastening the Effective Application of Research through Technology (HEART) trial.
The way in which dissemination of evidence changes medical practice needs to be better understood. Controversy about calcium-channel blockers (CCB) in the past 3 years has provided a natural experiment, enabling assessment of the impact of media stories, a national warning letter, a teleconference, small group workshops, and newsletters on first-line prescribing of antihypertensive drugs.
                We included all physicians (4403) in British Columbia who prescribed a thiazide diuretic, beta-blocker, inhibitor of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), or CCB as the first antihypertensive agent for 36,507 residents aged 66 years and over, with no previous or concurrent sign of underlying cardiovascular disease. We used a database covering all prescriptions to elderly people to measure the change in proportion of newly treated patients who received each class of drug as first-line therapy. We used a matched cohort design for assessment of the teleconference and workshops, a randomised community design for the newsletters, and time-series analysis for the media impacts.
                The proportion of patients who received a CCB as first-line therapy declined gradually from 22% in early 1994 to 15% in late 1996. This proportion was not affected by two waves of adverse news about CCBs in 1995, but fell by 5% for 5 months and by 3% for 1 month after two waves in 1996. The proportion of patients who received either a CCB or an ACE inhibitor as first-line therapy, contrary to guidelines, was still 42% overall in 1996. The workshops and newsletters were followed by shifts from first-line CCB to first-line thiazide prescribing.
                Changes in prescribing practices occur gradually with the accumulation of small impacts from educational interventions and lay media attention. Calcium antagonists are a first-line treatment for hypertension. The effectiveness of diltiazem, a non-dihydropyridine calcium antagonist, in reducing cardiovascular morbidity or mortality is unclear. We compared the effects of diltiazem with that of diuretics, beta-blockers, or both on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertensive patients.
                In a prospective, randomised, open, blinded endpoint study, we enrolled 10,881 patients, aged 50-74 years, at health centres in Norway and Sweden, who had diastolic blood pressure of 100 mm Hg or more. We randomly assigned patients diltiazem, or diuretics, beta-blockers, or both. The combined primary endpoint was fatal and non-fatal stroke, myocardial infarction, and other cardiovascular death. Analysis was done by intention to treat.
                Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were lowered effectively in the diltiazem and diuretic and beta-blocker groups (reduction 20.3/18.7 vs 23.3/18.7 mm Hg; difference in systolic reduction p<0.001). A primary endpoint occurred in 403 patients in the diltiazem group and in 400 in the diuretic and beta-blocker group (16.6 vs 16.2 events per 1000 patient-years; relative risk 1.00 [95% CI 0.87-1.15], p=0.97). Fatal and non-fatal stroke occurred in 159 patients in the diltiazem group and in 196 in the diuretic and beta-blocker group (6.4 vs 7.9 events per 1000 patient-years; 0.80 [0.65-0.99], p=0.04) and fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction in 183 and 157 patients (7.4 vs 6.3 events per 1000 patient-years; 1.16 [0.94-1.44], p=0.17).
                Diltiazem was as effective as treatment based on diuretics, beta-blockers, or both in preventing the combined primary endpoint of all stroke, myocardial infarction, and other cardiovascular death. The efficacy of antihypertensive drugs newer than diuretics and beta-blockers has not been established. We compared the effects of the calcium-channel blocker nifedipine once daily with the diuretic combination co-amilozide on cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in high-risk patients with hypertension.
                We did a prospective, randomised, double-blind trial in Europe and Israel in 6321 patients aged 55-80 years with hypertension (blood pressure > or = 150/95 mm Hg, or > or = 160 mm Hg systolic). Patients had at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor. We randomly assigned patients nifedipine 30 mg in a long-acting gastrointestinal-transport-system (GITS) formulation (n=3157), or co-amilozide (hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg [corrected] plus amiloride 2.5 mg; n=3164). Dose titration was by dose doubling, and addition of atenolol 25-50 mg or enalapril 5-10 mg. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, heart failure, or stroke. Analysis was done by intention to treat.
                Primary outcomes occurred in 200 (6.3%) patients in the nifedipine group and in 182 (5.8%) in the co-amilozide group (18.2 vs 16.5 events per 1000 patient-years; relative risk 1.10 [95% CI 0.91-1.34], p=0.35). Overall mean blood pressure fell from 173/99 mm Hg (SD 14/8) to 138/82 mm Hg (12/7). There was an 8% excess of withdrawals from the nifedipine group because of peripheral oedema (725 vs 518, p<0.0001), but serious adverse events were more frequent in the co-amilozide group (880 vs 796, p=0.02). Deaths were mainly non-vascular (nifedipine 176 vs co-amilozide 172; p=0.81). 80% of the primary events occurred in patients receiving randomised treatment (157 nifedipine, 147 co-amilozide, difference 0.33% [-0.7 to 1.4]).
                Nifedipine once daily and co-amilozide were equally effective in preventing overall cardiovascular or cerebrovascular complications. The choice of drug can be decided by tolerability and blood-pressure response rather than long-term safety or efficacy. Men aged 40-64 years with mild to moderate hypertension [diastolic blood pressure (DBP) 100-130 mmHg] were randomized to treatment with a diuretic (n = 3272) or a beta-blocker (n = 3297), with additional drugs if necessary, to determine whether a beta-blocker based treatment differs from thiazide diuretic based treatment with regard to the prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) events and death. Patients with previous CHD, stroke or other serious diseases, or with contraindications to diuretics or beta-blockers were excluded. If normotension (DBP less than 95 mmHg) was not achieved by monotherapy, other antihypertensive drugs were added, but the two basic drugs were not crossed over. Patients were assessed at 6-monthly intervals. The mean follow-up for end-points was 45.1 months. Blood pressure (BP) side effects and end-points were recorded in a standardized manner. Entry characteristics and the BP reduction achieved were very similar in both treatment groups. All analyses were made on an intention-to-treat basis. The incidence of CHD did not differ between the two treatment groups. The incidence of fatal stroke tended to be lower in the beta-blocker treated group than in the diuretic treated group. Total mortality and the total number of end-points were similar in both groups. The percentage of patients withdrawn due to side effects was similar, whereas the number of reported symptoms, according to a questionnaire, was higher for patients on beta-blockers. The incidence of diabetes did not differ between the two groups. Subgroup analyses did not detect a difference in the effect of beta-blockers compared with diuretics in smokers as opposed to non-smokers, and beta-blockers also had the same effects as diuretics in the quartile with the highest predicted risk for CHD. Beta-blockers and thiazide diuretics were approximately equally well tolerated. The two drugs had a similar BP reducing effect although additional drugs had to be given more often in the diuretic group. Antihypertensive treatment based on a beta-blocker or on a thiazide diuretic could not be shown to affect the prevention of hypertensive complications, including CHD, to a different extent. In a randomised trial based on a parallel design to determine the prophylactic effect of thiazide on stone formation, 210 calcium urolithiasis patients with idiopathic hypercalciuria were allocated either to treatment with trichlormethiazide (4 mg/day) or no treatment with only close follow-up; 35 patients were excluded for various reasons, including voluntary withdrawal. The background of the remaining 175 patients (82 in the thiazide group and 93 in the control group), including age and sex, was similar for both groups. In patients treated with thiazide there was a statistically significant fall in urinary calcium output. Statistical analyses also demonstrated that the stone formation rate in the thiazide group was significantly less than that in the control group. Adverse clinical reactions probably due to the drug were observed in 9 patients. These findings indicate that trichlormethiazide has a prophylactic effect on calcium urolithiasis in patients with idiopathic hypercalciuria. Thiazide diuretic agents lower the urinary excretion of calcium. Their use has been associated with increased bone density, but their role in preventing hip fracture has not been established. We prospectively studied the effect of thiazide diuretic agents on the incidence of hip fracture among 9518 men and women 65 years of age or older residing in three communities. At base line, 24 to 30 percent of the subjects were thiazide users. In the subsequent four years, 242 subjects had hip fractures. The incidence rates of hip fracture were lower among thiazide users than nonusers in each community; the Mantel-Haenszel relative risk of hip fracture, adjusted for community and age, was 0.63 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.46 to 0.86). The protective effect of the use of thiazides was independent of sex, age, impaired mobility, body-mass index, and current and former smoking status; the multivariate adjusted relative risk of hip fracture was 0.68 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.49 to 0.94). Furthermore, the protective effect was specific to thiazide diuretic agents, since there was no association between the use of antihypertensive medications other than thiazides and the risk of hip fracture. These prospective data suggest that in older men and women the use of thiazide diuretic agents is associated with a reduction of approximately one third in the risk of hip fracture. We examined the biochemical changes and the efficacy of indapamide in the prevention of calcium stone recurrences. Seventy-five patients with calcium nephrolithiasis and hypercalciuria were randomly assigned to three different therapies: diet and fluid (group A), diet and fluid plus indapamide 2.5 mg/day (group B), and diet and fluid plus indapamide 2.5 mg/day plus allopurinol 300 mg/day (group C). Before treatment and after 6, 12, 24, and 36 months of therapy, we evaluated blood pressure, serum and urine risk parameters (including relative supersaturations of calcium oxalate, calcium phosphate and uric acid), stone rate, and the proportion of calculi-free patients. During the 3 years of treatment, urinary calcium greatly decreased in groups B and C, dropping to 50% of the pretreatment values; urinary oxalate also significantly declined in group B (-24%) and group C (-27%). Relative supersaturations of calcium oxalate and calcium phosphate decreased to the same extent in groups B and C (about one-half of the pretreatment value), and relative supersaturation of uric acid was particularly reduced in group C (-65% of the pretreatment value). The stone rate improved in all three groups (p < 0.005), but using actuarial analysis in the evaluation of calculi-free patients, indapamide, and indapamide plus allopurinol groups were found to have a significantly more favorable effect than diet and fluid treatment (p < 0.02), without any difference between the two drug groups. Because indapamide has fewer side effects than thiazide diuretics, we conclude that indapamide could be an interesting alternative to thiazides in the prevention of calcium stones in hypercalciuric patients. To determine whether a computer-assisted reminder would alter prescribing habits for the treatment of hypertension in accordance with current clinical guidelines in a general internal medicine clinic.
                A randomized trial.
                The General Internal Medicine Clinic of the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle Division.
                Clinic providers were randomized to a control group (n = 35) or intervention group (n = 36). We targeted the providers of patients being treated for hypertension with calcium channel blockers, a class of drug not recommended for initial therapy.
                An automated computer query identified eligible patients and their providers. A guideline reminder was placed in the charts of patients of intervention providers; the charts of patients of control providers received no reminder.
                During the 5-month study period, 346 patients were seen by the 36 primary care providers (staff physicians, nurse practitioners, residents, and fellows) in the intervention group, and 373 patients were seen by the 35 providers in the control group. Intervention providers changed 39 patients (11.3%) to other medications during the study period, compared with 1 patient (<1.0%) of control providers (p < .0001). For patients whose therapy was unchanged, providers noted angina in 23.1%, indications other than those for hypertension in 9.5%, intolerable adverse effects with first-line therapy in 13.9%, and inadequate control with first-line therapy in 13.9%. Of those patients without provider-indicated contraindications, 23.6% were switched from calcium channel blockers to first-line agents during the intervention period.
                The use of a computerized, clinic-based intervention increased compliance with guidelines in the treatment of primary hypertension in general, and decreased the use of calcium channel blockers for the treatment of hypertension in particular. Actions of angiotensin II may contribute to the progression of heart failure despite treatment with currently recommended drugs. We therefore evaluated the long-term effects of the addition of the angiotensin-receptor blocker valsartan to standard therapy for heart failure.
                A total of 5010 patients with heart failure of New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II, III, or IV were randomly assigned to receive 160 mg of valsartan or placebo twice daily. The primary outcomes were mortality and the combined end point of mortality and morbidity, defined as the incidence of cardiac arrest with resuscitation, hospitalization for heart failure, or receipt of intravenous inotropic or vasodilator therapy for at least four hours.
                Overall mortality was similar in the two groups. The incidence of the combined end point, however, was 13.2 percent lower with valsartan than with placebo (relative risk, 0.87; 97.5 percent confidence interval, 0.77 to 0.97; P=0.009), predominantly because of a lower number of patients hospitalized for heart failure; 455 (18.2 percent) in the placebo group and 346 (13.8 percent) in the valsartan group (P<0.001). Treatment with valsartan also resulted in significant improvements in NYHA class, ejection fraction, signs and symptoms of heart failure, and quality of life as compared with placebo (P<0.01). In a post hoc analysis of the combined end point and mortality in subgroups defined according to base-line treatment with angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or beta-blockers, valsartan had a favorable effect in patients receiving neither or one of these types of drugs but an adverse effect in patients receiving both types of drugs.
                Valsartan significantly reduces the combined end point of mortality and morbidity and improves clinical signs and symptoms in patients with heart failure, when added to prescribed therapy. However, the post hoc observation of an adverse effect on mortality and morbidity in the subgroup receiving valsartan, an ACE inhibitor, and a beta-blocker raises concern about the potential safety of this specific combination. Effective therapies for reducing mortality rates in persons with coronary heart disease (CHD) remain underused. We report the results of an effectiveness trial of a quality improvement effort to increase the use of 3-hydroxy-3methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG CoA) reductase inhibitors, beta-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in patients with CHD in a network-model managed-care setting.
                Patients with CHD were identified by searching a claims database. The use of therapies was assessed by linkage with a pharmacy database. An intervention, consisting of a guideline summary, peer comparison performance feedback, and patient specific chart reminders was evaluated in a randomized, practice-based effectiveness trial.
                Data were available for >700 patients per year (1999-2002) in 131 practices. At baseline (1999), 55% of patients were receiving HMG CoA reductase inhibitors, 39% of patients were receiving beta-blockers, and 24% of patients were receiving ACE inhibitors. The use of all 3 types of medications increased steadily with time, with the exception of a decrease in the use of HMG CoA reductase inhibitors in the final year (2002). No difference in medication use was observed between randomized groups.
                The observed pattern of care supports the contention that the quality of outpatient care for secondary prevention of CHD improved from 1999 to 2002 in this setting. The basis for the inconsistent pattern of use of HMG CoA reductase inhibitors is not certain, but may relate to concerns about toxicity. Centralized mailings of guideline summaries, performance feedback reports, and chart reminders had no observable impact on quality of care in this setting. More intensive intervention may be required to improve the quality of outpatient care for the secondary prevention of CHD.
First-line low-dose thiazides reduce all morbidity and mortality outcomes. First-line ACE inhibitors and calcium channel blockers may be similarly effective but the evidence is less robust. First-line high-dose thiazides and first-line beta-blockers are inferior to first-line low-dose thiazides.