Antihypertensive drug utilization at health centres in a district of Istanbul
- 127 Downloads
Since irrational use of antihypertensives has considerable clinical and economical consequences, this study was conducted to evaluate antihypertensive drug utilization in hypertension at seven State Health Centres in Istanbul.
A total of 297 hypertensive patients who accepted to␣participate in the study were evaluated by a face-to-face questionnaire and a copy of their prescriptions were collected for prescription analysis.
Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (31.7%), calcium channel blockers (28.8%), diuretics (16.2%), beta blockers (7.5%) and others (15.8%) have been prescribed. There were no statistically significant relation between prescribed antihypertensive drug groups and gender, age, and NSAIDs co-prescribing. The most frequent comorbidity in hypertensive patients was diabetes mellitus (10.4%) and calcium channel blockers (35.5%) have been prescribed to them as a first antihypertensive medication. Average cost per prescription was $ 42.7±38.1. According to the patients’ self-reporting, the majority of them (85%) were prescribed without a physical examination. The physicians failed to write the prescriptions appropriately; only 5% of the scripts contained all information about the drug(s) and use instructions in full format.
The present study indicates that GPs working at primary healthcare centres were rational in terms of antihypertensive drug choice. However, they poorly applied rational pharmacotherapy principles such as (a) writing a “good” prescription which is easily readable by the pharmacist and the patient and that contains full essential information; (b) a medical examination of the patient to assess her/his current clinical condition; and (c) taking care of not prescribing drugs with potential interaction like antihypertensives and NSAIDs together.
Key wordsHypertension Prescription Rational pharmacotherapy General practitioner Turkey Antihypertensives
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
This study was supported by Marmara University School of Medicine, Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacology.
- 1.Guidelines Subcommittee World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the management of hypertension. J Hypertens 1999; 17:151–183Google Scholar
- 5.Altan Onat, editor. Heart Health, Risk Profile and Heart Disease among Turkish Adults. TEKHARF Study. August 2000, Istanbul. ISBN: 975-596-016-3Google Scholar
- 9.Avanzini F, Alli C, Colombo P, Corsetti A, Colombo F, Tognoni G. Control of hypertension in Italy: results of the “study on antihypertensive treatment in general practice. (STAP)”. Physicians taking part in STAP. G Ital Cardiol 1998; 28:760–766Google Scholar
- 14.Avanzini F, Corsetti A, Maglione T, Alli C, Colombo F, Torri V, et al. Simple, shared guidelines raise the quality of antihypertensive treatment in routine care. Am Heart J 2002; 144:726–732Google Scholar
- 15.De Vries TPGM, Henning RH, Hogerzeil HV, Fresle DA. Guide to Good Prescribing. WHO/Action programme on essential drugs, Geneva, 1994 WHO/DAP/94.11Google Scholar
- 17.Akici A, Kalaca S, Gören MZ, Akkan AG, Karaalp A, Demir D, et al. Comparison rational pharmacotherapy decision making competence of general practitioners with intern doctors. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2004; 60(2):75–82Google Scholar
- 18.Akici A, Kalaca S, Ugurlu MU, Karaalp A, Cali S, Oktay S. Impact of a short postgraduate course in rational pharmacotherapy for general practitioners. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2004; 57(3):310–321Google Scholar
- 20.Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Health. Diagnose and Treatment Guideline for Primary Health Care 2002 ISBN:975-590-058-6Google Scholar
- 21.WHO/DAP/93.1 How to investigate drug use health facilities: selected drug use indicators. Geneva, 1993Google Scholar
- 22.Kayaalp SO. BNF/TİK (British National Formulary/Turkish National Formulary- 2001). Turgut Yayıncılık ve Tic AŞ, Istanbul, Turkey. 2001 ISBN 975-7958-22-0Google Scholar
- 23.The International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification” (ICD-9-CM), Sixth Edition, issued for use beginning October 1, 2003 for federal fiscal year 2004 (FY04)Google Scholar
- 30.Mazzeo F, Motola G, Rossi S, Russo F, Vitelli MR, Capuano A, et al. Management of hypertension by general practitioners : an Italian observational study. Adv Ther 2001; 18(3):122–130Google Scholar
- 31.Siegel D, Lopez J, Meier J, Goldstein MK, Lee S, Brazill BJ, et al. Academic detailing to␣improve antihypertensive prescribing patterns. Am J Hypertens 2003; 16:508–511Google Scholar
- 34.Parving HH. Is antihypertensive treatment the same for NIDDM and IDDM patients? Diabetes Res Clin Pract 1998; 39(Suppl):S43–S47Google Scholar
- 35.Pahor M, Psaty BM, Alderman MH, Applegate WB, Williamson JD, Cavazzini C, et al. Health outcomes associated with calcium antagonists compared with other first-line antihypertensive therapies: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Lancet 2000; 356: 1949–1954Google Scholar