Skip to main content
Log in

β—Blockers vs Calcium Channel Blockers vs ACE Inhibitors

  • Current Comment
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The use of β—blockers in therapeutics is well established. This article poses 3 questions: (a) what are the particular advantages of β—blockers, and are these important? (b) what problems are caused by β—blockers, and how serious are these? (c) is it possible to maximise the benefits and minimise the unwanted effects by choosing a particular β—blocker or a specific pharmaceutical formulation? The first question is barely addressed but the other two are discussed by reviewing methods for assessing quality of life in the specific field of hypertension, and examining the association between adverse effects of β—blockers and their physicochemical and pharmacodynamic properties. There is an interesting section contrasting the severity and nature of adverse effects in different populations. The tolerability of β—blockers demonstrated in large trials after myocardial infarction provides a contrast with the numerous measures of impaired performance detectable in healthy volunteers. There is also a suggestion that β—blockers are tolerated more readily by patients with type A personalities. The influence of plasma concentration on adverse effects is mentioned briefly, with some support for using a controlled release formulation to reduce fluctuation and adverse effects at peak concentrations. The authors conclude that hydro/lipophilicity is of minor importance, but β1—selectivity may have some impact on quality of life, and β1—selective agents are equivalent to calcium channel blockers and ACE inhibitors but (implicitly) superior to nonselective β—blockers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barton LL, Friedman AD, Sharkey AM. Impetigo contagiosa III. Comparative efficacy of oral erythromycin and topical muplrocin. Pediatric Dermatology 6: 134–138, 1989

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfarb J, Crenshaw D, O’Horo J, Lemon E, Blumer JL. Randomized clinical trial of topical mupirocin versus oral erythromycin for impetigo. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 32: 1780–1783, 1988

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mc Linn S. Topical mupirocin vs. systemIc erythromycin treatment for pyoderma. Pediatric Infectious Diseases Journal 7: 785–790, 1988

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

C, D., E, D., M, K. et al. β—Blockers vs Calcium Channel Blockers vs ACE Inhibitors. Pharmacoeconomics 1, 460–462 (1992). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199201060-00006

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199201060-00006

Keywords

Navigation