ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2019
Prescribing Patterns of Antihypertensive Medications in US Ambulatory Care Settings.
Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Ecology of Antihypertensives in the United States, 1997-2017.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over 70 million Americans are diagnosed with hypertension. Adherence to current AHA/ACC 2017 hypertension guidelines and appropriate antihypertensive therapy is important for optimal treatment outcomes. This study investigates prescribing patterns for ambulatory care patients with hypertension and adherence to these guidelines. Data from the 2015 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) were used in the study. Patients with primary diagnoses of essential hypertension were extracted from the data using ICD-9 code "401". A total of 595 patients were identified. Correlation among demographic variables, source of payment and prescriber specialty were examined. Chi-square and descriptive analysis were performed. 51.4% of the prescriptions were non-first-line medications. Primary care physicians and cardiologists adhered to the guidelines more, when compared to the other specialties. There was a significant difference between various geographic regions, as it relates to guidelines adherence. This study concluded that prescribers do not always adhere to the AHA/ACC 2017 hypertension guidelines. It is recommended to adhere to the guidelines if there are no contraindications. The study's findings were limited to the ambulatory patients visiting providers in 2015 and by the operational definitions of the study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.