{"title":"The Use of Renin-Angiotensin System Blockades Among Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease","authors":"Majeed Hassan Shekhany","doi":"10.56056/amj.2023.219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and objectives: Hypertension is common in adult patients with chronic kidney disease with a prevalence that depends on the stage and etiology of chronic kidney disease and has been reported to range from 60-90%. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical use of renin angiotensin system blockers in chronic kidney disease patients and to identify their potential indications, contraindications and side effects amongst different clinical specialties in relation to their clinical outcomes. Methods: This study was a descriptive cross sectional based on self-administered online questionnaire, 133 medical doctors from different specialties including nephrologists, internists, urologists, general practitioners responded to the questionnaire and filled it up, which was composed of three main parts including the socio-demographic data of the participants, data about CKD and its stages and finally the RAS blockades. The study extended from June until July 2021. Results: The mean age ± standard deviation of respondents was 44.65 ± 6.89 years. Nearly one third of the respondents were internist, 12.8% nephrologist, 7.5% urologist and 45.9% from other different specialties. The vast majority (98.5%) of the physicians thought that renin angiotensin system inhibitors are effective anti-hypertensive agents even for chronic kidney disease patients. Most of the nephrologists and other specialties would continue the renin angiotensin system inhibitors while most of the internists and urologists would either stop or change the renin angiotensin system inhibitors, this was statistically significant and p–value was 0.010.","PeriodicalId":314832,"journal":{"name":"Advanced medical journal","volume":"73 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advanced medical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56056/amj.2023.219","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: Hypertension is common in adult patients with chronic kidney disease with a prevalence that depends on the stage and etiology of chronic kidney disease and has been reported to range from 60-90%. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical use of renin angiotensin system blockers in chronic kidney disease patients and to identify their potential indications, contraindications and side effects amongst different clinical specialties in relation to their clinical outcomes. Methods: This study was a descriptive cross sectional based on self-administered online questionnaire, 133 medical doctors from different specialties including nephrologists, internists, urologists, general practitioners responded to the questionnaire and filled it up, which was composed of three main parts including the socio-demographic data of the participants, data about CKD and its stages and finally the RAS blockades. The study extended from June until July 2021. Results: The mean age ± standard deviation of respondents was 44.65 ± 6.89 years. Nearly one third of the respondents were internist, 12.8% nephrologist, 7.5% urologist and 45.9% from other different specialties. The vast majority (98.5%) of the physicians thought that renin angiotensin system inhibitors are effective anti-hypertensive agents even for chronic kidney disease patients. Most of the nephrologists and other specialties would continue the renin angiotensin system inhibitors while most of the internists and urologists would either stop or change the renin angiotensin system inhibitors, this was statistically significant and p–value was 0.010.