Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34567875›Full record

ReviewCureus2021

Once- Versus Twice-Daily Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors for Blood Pressure Control in Adult Patients With Hypertension.

Kyle Fischer, Sandy Diec

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kyle FischerPharmacy, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA.
Sandy DiecPharmacy, University of Houston, College of Pharmacy, Houston, USA.
University of Houston · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of once- versus twice-daily administration of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors for the management of hypertension. A literature search on PubMed and Google Scholar was performed (January 1980 to June 2020) using the following search terms: ACE inhibitors, lisinopril, enalapril, fosinopril, trandolapril, ramipril, perindopril, captopril, benazepril, ambulatory blood pressure, hypertension, twice-daily dosing, once-daily dosing. Reference lists from retrieved articles were examined for additional reports. Relevant English-language studies or those conducted in humans were considered. Overall, six studies were included that compared the efficacy of once-daily to twice-daily dosing of ACE inhibitors. Similar blood pressure-lowering effects, and, in some studies, greater blood pressure lowering has been noted in the twice-daily administration arm than once-daily administration of ACE inhibitors. ACE inhibitors' pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties play an integral role in determining the expected blood pressure-lowering outcome. It is noteworthy that adherence issues may arise when transitioning from a once-daily regimen to a twice-daily regimen. There appear to be no added safety concerns between twice-daily and once-daily administration of ACE inhibitors regarding safety outcomes. After reviewing the available literature, twice-daily dosing of ACE inhibitors may promote added blood pressure-lowering effects, with the advantages of reducing cost, reducing the risk of drug-drug interactions, reducing polypharmacy, and reducing patient confusion about their medications. Recommendations for twice-daily administration of ACE -inhibitors should be made via shared decision-making with the patient, and clinician judgment, to drive treatment selection.

Indexed as

ace inhibitorsambulatory blood pressureblood pressure responsehypertensiononce- versus twice-daily dosing

Identifiers

PMID34567875
PMCPMC8451516
OpenAlexW3194637178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.