Effectiveness and safety assessment of calcium channel blockers compared to beta blockers in patients with angina: An observational study.

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Shama Abidi, Saira Saeed Khan, Sadaf Naeem, Humera Siddiqui, Sumaira Khadim, Saima Saleem, Saira Erum Ejaz, Syed Ishtiaq Rasool, Syeda Maheen Zahidi
{"title":"Effectiveness and safety assessment of calcium channel blockers compared to beta blockers in patients with angina: An observational study.","authors":"Shama Abidi, Saira Saeed Khan, Sadaf Naeem, Humera Siddiqui, Sumaira Khadim, Saima Saleem, Saira Erum Ejaz, Syed Ishtiaq Rasool, Syeda Maheen Zahidi","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Beta blockers (BB) and calcium channel blockers (CCB) are highly effective to suppress angina attacks. Current observational study is designed to investigate the effectiveness of BB, CCB and its combination in angina patients. Angina patients from different tertiary care hospital cardiology OPDs were recruited from June 2022 to June 2023. Patient's history and suspected adverse drug effects (ADE) observed by manual chart review. Results showed baseline demographics and comorbidities were similar. Medication assessment revealed that most patients were on CCB (54.4%) and BB (36.36%) than combination (9.8%). Compared with BB, CCB and combination drugs taking patients represented stable heart rate and blood pressure (P<0.05). There were insignificant differences were observed in electrolytes and lipid profile in each groups. In addition, the Seattle questionnaire for angina (SQA) showed improved symptoms in 83 patients out of 110 (P<0.05). Further ADE were observed by using Naranjo scale that represented BB taking patients were found to have more ADRs than CCB and combination therapy. In conclusion, patients using BB, CCB or a combination of CCB+BB had improved angina symptoms and represented same efficacy however CCB exhibited lesser number of ADRs that shows CCB is more effective than BB in prolong use of angina control.</p>","PeriodicalId":19971,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan journal of pharmaceutical sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan journal of pharmaceutical sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Beta blockers (BB) and calcium channel blockers (CCB) are highly effective to suppress angina attacks. Current observational study is designed to investigate the effectiveness of BB, CCB and its combination in angina patients. Angina patients from different tertiary care hospital cardiology OPDs were recruited from June 2022 to June 2023. Patient's history and suspected adverse drug effects (ADE) observed by manual chart review. Results showed baseline demographics and comorbidities were similar. Medication assessment revealed that most patients were on CCB (54.4%) and BB (36.36%) than combination (9.8%). Compared with BB, CCB and combination drugs taking patients represented stable heart rate and blood pressure (P<0.05). There were insignificant differences were observed in electrolytes and lipid profile in each groups. In addition, the Seattle questionnaire for angina (SQA) showed improved symptoms in 83 patients out of 110 (P<0.05). Further ADE were observed by using Naranjo scale that represented BB taking patients were found to have more ADRs than CCB and combination therapy. In conclusion, patients using BB, CCB or a combination of CCB+BB had improved angina symptoms and represented same efficacy however CCB exhibited lesser number of ADRs that shows CCB is more effective than BB in prolong use of angina control.

钙通道阻滞剂与β受体阻滞剂相比对心绞痛患者的有效性和安全性评估:一项观察性研究。
β受体阻滞剂(BB)和钙通道阻滞剂(CCB)对抑制心绞痛发作非常有效。目前的观察性研究旨在调查β受体阻滞剂、钙通道阻滞剂及其联合用药对心绞痛患者的疗效。研究人员于 2022 年 6 月至 2023 年 6 月期间从不同的三级医院心内科手术室招募了心绞痛患者。通过人工病历审查观察患者的病史和疑似药物不良反应(ADE)。结果显示,基线人口统计学和合并症相似。用药评估显示,大多数患者服用的药物是氯羟安定(54.4%)和苯乙双胍(36.36%),而不是联合用药(9.8%)。与 BB、CCB 和联合用药相比,服用 CCB 和联合用药的患者心率和血压稳定(P<0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
211
审稿时长
4.5 months
期刊介绍: Pakistan Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (PJPS) is a peer reviewed multi-disciplinary pharmaceutical sciences journal. The PJPS had its origin in 1988 from the Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Karachi as a biannual journal, frequency converted as quarterly in 2005, and now PJPS is being published as bi-monthly from January 2013. PJPS covers Biological, Pharmaceutical and Medicinal Research (Drug Delivery, Pharmacy Management, Molecular Biology, Biochemical, Pharmacology, Pharmacokinetics, Phytochemical, Bio-analytical, Therapeutics, Biotechnology and research on nano particles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信