Evaluating the treatment of hypertension in diabetes mellitus: a need for better control?

Objectives To determine how well and to what extent blood pressure (BP) is controlled in diabetic hypertensive patients treated by primary care doctors, and to evaluate drug therapy in the backdrop of risk factors and laboratory findings. Methods A therapeutic audit of the medical records of diabetic hypertensives from nine primary care health centres in Bahrain. Results In 266 diabetic hypertensives (82 males and 184 females), the recommended target BP < 130/< 85 mmHg (WHO/ISH guidelines, 1999) was achieved in 20 (9.8%) with a BP of 119 ± 4/76 ± 5 mmHg. Among those who did not achieve target BP, 70 (34.5%) lacked systolic BP control (BP = 153 ± 17/79 ± 3 mmHg), four (2%) lacked diastolic BP control (BP = 123 ± 3/86 ± 3 mmHg) and 109 (53.7%) lacked both systolic and diastolic BP control (BP = 158 ± 20/94 ± 7 mmHg). The mean age of the group achieving target BP was significantly lower than the group which lacked systolic BP control (51.6 ± 9 vs. 63.5 ± 9 years; P < 0.0001). While there were no significant differences in fasting blood glucose, glycosylated haemoglobin, triglycerides, urea, creatinine, uric acid and serum electrolytes between the group achieving target BP vs. groups without target BP, a significant difference in total cholesterol was seen. Patients with ischaemic heart disease and/or isolated systolic hypertension did not achieve the target BP. Antihypertensive monotherapy was prescribed in 145 (54.5%) patients, whereas two‐ and three‐drug combinations were prescribed in 32.3 and 8.2% of patients, respectively. As monotherapy, angiotensin‐converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors were the most frequently prescribed drugs followed by β‐blockers, calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and diuretics. As two‐drug combinations, an ACE inhibitor with a β‐blocker/diuretic and a β‐blocker with a CCB/diuretic were usually prescribed. Conclusions According to the WHO/ISH 1999 guidelines, approximately one out of 10 diabetic hypertensives achieved target BP control. In many instances, the drug therapy prescribed was inappropriate considering the comorbidity in patients and their laboratory findings. Improved BP control is needed in treating high‐risk groups such as patients with diabetes mellitus, and efforts should be made to improve the treatment of hypertension in the primary care setting.     

Considerations of prescribers and pharmacists for the use of non‐selective β‐blockers in asthma and COPD patients: An explorative study

Rationale, aims, and objectives

Despite recommendations in prevailing guidelines to avoid the use of non‐selective (NS) β‐blockers in patients with asthma or COPD, on average, 10 patients per community pharmacy receive NS β‐blockers monthly. The aim of our study was to identify the reasons of prescribers and pharmacists to treat asthma and COPD patients with NS β‐blockers.

Methods

Fifty‐three community pharmacists in the Netherlands selected patients with actual concurrent use of inhalation medication and NS β‐blockers. For at least 5 patients, each pharmacist screened all medication surveillance signals and actions taken at first dispensing. Each pharmacist selected 3 different initial prescribers for a short interview to explore their awareness of the co‐morbidity and reasons to apply NS β‐blockers.

Results

Pharmacists identified 827 asthma/COPD patients with actual use of NS β‐blockers. From these, 153 NS β‐blocker prescribers were selected and interviewed (64 general practitioners, 45 ophthalmologists, 24 cardiologists, and 20 other prescribers). One hundred seven prescribers were aware of the drug‐disease interaction of the asthma or COPD co‐morbidity when initiating the NS β‐blocker, and 46 were not. From these, 40 prescribers did not consider the contraindication to be relevant. For 299 patients, medication surveillance signals and actions at first dispensing were retrieved. Patients used predominantly ocular timolol (39.8%), and the oral preparations propranolol (30.8%) and carvedilol (15.1%). In 154 cases, the pharmacy system generated a warning alert.

Conclusions

A substantial number of prescribers was unaware of the co‐morbidity or did not regard NS β‐blockers contraindicated, despite prevailing clinical guidelines. Improvement programs should target prescribers' awareness and knowledge of NS β‐blockers in patients with asthma or COPD.     

Heart failure and neuroendocrine activation: diagnostic,prognostic and therapeutic perspectives

The important neuroendocrine systems involved in heart failure are reviewed with special emphasis on their possible role in pathophysiology and their relation to prognostic and diagnostic information. Plasma levels of noradrenaline (NA), renin, vasopressin, endothelin‐1, atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and tumour necrosis factor‐α (TNF‐α) are all elevated in heart failure. Activity of the sympathetic nervous system as reflected by NA is correlated to mortality and seems to possess independent prognostic information. Several studies have now documented the beneficial effect of β‐blockade in chronic heart failure (CHF). Renin seems to be a poor prognostic marker in CHF possibly because of the interference with diuretic treatment, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE)‐inhibitors and angiotensin II antagonist, and probably also because of the significance of tissue renin‐angiotensin system (RAS), poorly reflected by plasma renin. On the other hand, several large‐scale trials with ACE‐inhibitors and angiotensin II antagonists have demonstrated reduced mortality and morbidity in CHF. Plasma vasopressin does not seem to possess prognostic information but testing of non‐peptide antagonists is ongoing. Endothelin‐1 seems to have independent prognostic information and endothelin receptor antagonists may represent a therapeutic possibility. The natriuretic peptides ANP and BNP are correlated to prognosis and possess independent information. Brain natriuretic peptide and N‐terminal ANP seem to increase early, i.e. in asymptomatic heart failure. Plasma BNP being more stable than ANP is therefore a promising measure of left ventricular dysfunction. Increase in ANP and BNP, potentially beneficial, may be achieved by administration of neutral endopeptidase inhibitors, at present an unsettled therapeutic possibility. Several cytokines are increased in heart failure and especially TNF‐α has drawn attention. Experimental studies suggest that TNF‐α is important in the pathophysiology of heart failure and preliminary studies indicate that inhibition of TNF‐α seems to be a possible therapeutic approach. Thus, neuroendocrine markers seem to (i) have a role in diagnosis and classification of heart failure, (ii) be useful in providing a ‘neuroendocrine profile’ which enlightens different aspects of heart failure, and therefore (iii) in the future probably will be valuable in the choice of medical treatment of the individual patient. In addition to β‐blockers, ACE‐inhibitors and angiotensin II antagonists several new drugs based on neuroendocrine modification are on their way and might become important in the future.     

Management of advanced heart failure

Congestive heart failure (CHF) due to progressive systolic dysfunction has become a modern-day epidemic. Despite the increased incidence and prevalence, significant progress has been made in the past 10 to 15 years in the treatment of CHF at all stages. The current outlook for patients with newly diagnosed, mild heart failure is encouraging. It should be noted, however, that most of the morbidity and health care expenditure is incurred by a minority of patients diagnosed with CHF who are in the advanced stages of their disease. The thrust of this article will be to provide practical advice beyond current guidelines on the management of advanced CHF.     

Management of advanced heart failure

Congestive heart failure (CHF) due to progressive systolic dysfunction has become a modern-day epidemic. Despite the increased incidence and prevalence, significant progress has been made in the past 10 to 15 years in the treatment of CHF at all stages. The current outlook for patients with newly diagnosed, mild heart failure is encouraging. It should be noted, however, that most of the morbidity and health care expenditure is incurred by a minority of patients diagnosed with CHF who are in the advanced stages of their disease. The thrust of this article will be to provide practical advice beyond current guidelines on the management of advanced CHF.     

Beta blockers for CHF. Adrenergic blockade dramatically reduces morbidity and mortality

Several large clinical trials have shown that beta blockers can reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with CHF. Therefore, current guidelines for treatment of CHF now include beta blockers as standard therapy for patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (ejection fraction < or = 40%) and mild to moderate heart failure. Beta-blocker therapy for CHF should be started cautiously and increased gradually to avoid exacerbating symptoms of heart failure. At this time, data for therapy in patients with NYHA class I or IV symptoms are limited, and it is unclear whether all beta blockers confer benefit or whether some are better than others. Several trials are under way to answer these questions. Until more evidence is available, only those agents that have proved beneficial in mortality trials should be used to manage CHF.     

An educational programme for peer review groups to improve treatment of chronic heart failure and diabetes mellitus type 2 in general practice

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Peer review groups are considered helpful for quality improvement in primary care. An interactive educational programme for small peer groups was developed, focusing on the implementation of newly developed treatment guidelines. The aim is to evaluate the effect of the programme on adherence to treatment guidelines in general practice. METHODS: A cluster randomized trial using a balanced incomplete block design was used; one arm received a programme on treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF), the other on hypertension treatment in diabetes mellitus type 2 (T2DM). A random sample of 10 CHF and 10 T2DM patients per GP was drawn, for whom data were extracted from electronic patient records 1 years before and 6 months after the intervention. The outcomes were prescribing of ACE inhibitors, and antihypertensive treatment in T2DM. The effect was analysed separately for both programmes using multilevel regression models. RESULTS: All 27 peer review groups in one region in the Netherlands were randomized, of which 16 participated. No significant effects were observed in the CHF group or in the T2DM group. The opportunity for change was limited, as only 53% of the CHF patients and 60% of the T2DM patients had a contact with their GP between the intervention and follow-up measurement. CONCLUSION: The peer review programme was not successful for changing the treatment of chronic patients, although the programme focused on dealing with barriers perceived by the participants. Not all problems perceived can be solved in a peer group discussion.     

Heart failure in the practice of primary health care in Kemerovo

AIM: To study quality of therapy of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients in primary health care institutions of Kemerovo city. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Records for 200 outpatients with CHF admitted to cardiological departments of Kemerovo hospitals were analysed. The treatment quality was assessed by special sheets reflecting treatment of CHF patients. RESULTS: CHF most frequently resulted from ischemic heart disease and arterial hypertenion (67.6 and 18.9% patients, respectively). Among medicines, ACE inhibitors in subnormal doses were used most frequently (70.9%), less often were administered disaggregants (52.4%), beta-adrenoblockers in low doses (50.4%), diuretic drugs (43.3%), cardiac glycosides (16.5%) and aldosteron antagonists (28.6%). Calcium antagonists were prescribed to 19.7%, metabolic medication--to 22.1%, nitrates --to 37.8% patients. CONCLUSION: As a rule, CHF treatment in outpatient clinics of Kemerovo was made according to national standards except underestimation of beta-adrenoblockers, cardiac glycosides and too frequent administration of calcium antagonists and some metabolic drugs.     

The effectiveness of adhering to clinical‐practice guidelines for anxiety disorders in secondary mental health care: the results of a cohort study in the Netherlands

Background While studies into the implementation of clinical practice guidelines for mental health care are scarce, studies on the effectiveness of implementing practice guidelines for anxiety disorders appear to be entirely non‐existent. Objective To examine whether adherence to anxiety disorder clinical practice guidelines in secondary mental health care yields superior treatment results than non‐adherence. Method A closed‐cohort study of 181 outpatients with an anxiety disorder or hypochondriasis who were treated in a routine mental health setting. Preceding the inclusion of these 181 patients, a start was made on the implementation of the Dutch national multidisciplinary practice guidelines for anxiety disorders. Patients were asked to complete several questionnaires before the start of treatment and again 1 year later. The medical records of these patients were reviewed to assess guideline adherence. Ultimately, adherence or non‐adherence to the different treatment algorithms described in the guidelines was related to changes in the severity of psychiatric symptomatology, psychiatric functioning, general well‐being and satisfaction with treatment. Results Compared with patients whose treatment did not adhere to the guidelines, those whose treatment adhered to the guidelines were found to have greater symptom reduction after 1 year (P < 0.01). The latter group of patients also rated their satisfaction with their treatment significantly higher (P = 0.01). No significant differences were found after 1 year with respect to changes in impairment of functioning and quality of life in the two groups of patients. Conclusions Adherence to anxiety disorder guidelines yields superior treatment results and increased patient satisfaction with treatment when compared with patients whose treatment did not adhere to the clinical guidelines. These results should encourage a more widespread implementation of such guidelines in mental health care facilities.     

Adherence to clinical guidelines in heart failure (HF) outpatients: Impact of an interprofessional HF team on evidence-based medication use

Abstract

Clinical systolic heart failure (HF) guidelines specify recommendations for ACE inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), and beta blockers according to doses used in clinical trials. However, many HF patients remain suboptimally treated. We sought to determine which provider type, between an interprofessional HF team, non-HF cardiologists, and primary care physicians (PCP), most optimally manages HF medications and doses. A retrospective chart review was performed on adult patients at an academic county hospital with an ejection fraction ≤40% and a diagnosis of HF, seen by a single provider type (HF team, cardiologist, or PCP) at least twice within a 12-month period. Utilization rates of any ACEI/ARB and any beta blocker were robust across provider types, though evidence-based ACEI/ARB and beta blocker were greatest from the HF team. Doses of evidence-based therapies dropped markedly in the non-HF team groups. The percent of patients prescribed optimal doses of an evidence-based ACEI/ARB AND beta blocker was 69%, 33%, and 25% for the HF team, cardiologists and PCPs, respectively (p?<?0.0167). Patients followed by the HF team were more frequently prescribed evidence-based medications at optimal doses. This supports using specialized interprofessional HF teams to attain greater adherence to evidence-based recommendations in treating systolic HF.     

Management of acute coronary syndrome in a tertiary care general medical unit in Sri Lanka: how closely do we follow the guidelines?

Background and objectives: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a leading cause of death. Correct implementation of evidence‐based guidelines should improve outcome. We conducted this study to determine to what extent management of ACS in a tertiary care medical ward in Sri Lanka adhered to current guidelines. Study methods: This prospective observational study was carried out in the University Medical Unit of the National Hospital, Colombo, Sri Lanka, for a 5‐month period commencing April 2008. All patients presenting with ACS to the unit were included. Results: During the period of study, there were 101 admissions of confirmed ACS. Thirty‐one (30·6%) and 40 (39·6%) patients had not received the required correct loading dose of aspirin and clopidogrel, respectively. There were 34 cases of ST‐elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI); 26 patients were eligible for thrombolysis and streptokinase was given to 22 (84·6%). The rest were treated with low‐molecular‐weight heparin (LMWH). Of the 67 patients who did not have STEMI, 66 received the correct dose of LMWH. Fifty‐two patients (51·4%) were started on a β‐blocker at presentation. None of the patients received intravenous β‐blockers. Seventy‐four patients (73·2%) were started on either an angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker on presentation. None of the patients underwent primary percutaneous intervention. Conclusion: Adherence to guidelines is limited by lack of funds and resources in our setting; however, attention must be paid to non‐costly easily correctable deficits.     

Provider response to computer-based care suggestions for chronic heart failure

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the responses of providers to recommendations generated by a computer-management system for chronic heart failure (CHF). METHODS: This study is an analysis of primary care providers' responses to evidence-based computer-generated suggestions regarding patients with CHF at one center of a randomized trial. The trial randomized primary care providers from 2 VA Medical Centers to receive care suggestions regarding patients with CHF, with or without inclusion of patient symptom data obtained from pre-visit questionnaires. At one center, providers were asked to respond to the suggestions with hand-written comments and a numerical agreement scale. RESULTS: Providers responded to 774 care suggestions (62% of the 1246 delivered). They agreed with 41%, had major disagreements with 12%, and had minor disagreements with 22%. For 7% of the care suggestions, providers asked to not see it again for that patient. The most common reasons for major or minor disagreements were a belief that the suggestion was wrong or unnecessary (45%) or would not be tolerated by the patient (32%). External barriers to implementation of guidelines, lack of guideline awareness, or disagreement with guidelines were uncommon reasons cited by providers in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Providers agreed with less than half of computer-generated care suggestions from evidence-based CHF guidelines, most often because the suggestions were felt to be inapplicable to their patients or unlikely to be tolerated.     

Development of a Congestive Heart Failure Protocol in a Rehabilitation Setting

A number of patients in a rehabilitation setting were being transferred to acute‐care facilities with a diagnosis of congestive heart failure (CHF). A transfer penalty was charged to the rehabilitation facility based on each patient's length of stay. A multidisciplinary team was assembled with physician support to address the problem. The team's goal was to develop a CHF protocol with guidelines that would allow for more frequent nursing assessments and reporting to physicians. The protocol interventions were initiated consistently and monitored on each shift. These interventions allowed for more timely assessment and treatment of patients with signs and symptoms of CHF. As a result, the number of patients being transferred to acute‐care hospitals has decreased, allowing patients to complete their rehabilitation process without interruption. The decreased number of patients being transferred to the acute‐care setting has resulted in fewer transfer penalties for the rehabilitation facility.     

Management of hypertension in chronic heart failure

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is associated with frequent hospitalizations and high mortality. It affects more than 5 million individuals in the USA, and another 660,000 new cases are diagnosed each year; overall, heart failure (HF) now accounts for 7% of all deaths from cardiovascular disease. Hypertension (HTN) increases the risk of development of HF and it precedes it in 75% of cases. HF patients are nearly evenly divided between those with reduced left ventricular (LV) function or systolic dysfunction and those with preserved LV systolic function or diastolic dysfunction. The management of HTN in patients with CHF is challenging. Drugs such as β-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitiors, angiotensin receptor blockers, aldosterone receptor blockers, hydralazine and nitrates, which have shown mortality benefit in CHF and exert antihypertensive effects, should be used as first-line agents to control HTN in CHF. In addition, antihypertensive drugs such as α-receptor blockers that can increase mortality in HF should be avoided. The dihydropyridine group of calcium channel blockers are good antihypertensive medications with a neutral effect on mortality in patients with CHF. These may be used in CHF patients with refractory HTN. In patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction, HTN is treated differently in comparison to patients with HF with normal ejection fraction. This article reviews the treatment of essential HTN in patients at risk for developing HF, in the presence of HF and the latest developments in treatment that might benefit both HTN and HF management.     

The benefits of valsartan in the treatment of heart failure: results from Val-HeFT

Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are the most recent class of anti-hypertensive drug to enter clinical use for chronic heart failure (CHF). In the landmark Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT), valsartan reduced the risk of the combined endpoint of all-cause mortality and morbidity by 13.2% over a 2-year follow-up. Although it significantly improved a pre-specified primary endpoint, it did not improve the endpoint of all-cause mortality. Valsartan administered to patients not receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) at baseline reduced the endpoint of all-cause mortality by 33% and the combined endpoint of mortality and morbidity by 44%, compared with placebo. Based on these findings, valsartan became the first ARB to be approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of New York Heart Association class II-IV HF in patients who are intolerant of ACEIs. This review provides a summary of the key Val-HeFT results and their implications in the treatment of CHF patients.