ArticleScientific reports2025
Antihypertensive drug-related problems in Vietnamese ambulatory care.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evidence of antihypertensive drug-related problems (aDRP) is limited in Asian ambulatory care. To better detect aDRP without causing alert fatigue, we investigated whether adding more antihypertensive agents was associated with increasing aDRP risk and factors associated with physician acceptance of aDRP correction. We conducted a cross-sectional study targeting ambulatory prescriptions of Vietnamese patients with hypertension who either received standard therapy (using two or fewer medications, SdT) or standard plus add-on therapy (using more than two medications, SdT + add-on). Primary and secondary outcomes were number of aDRP and correction ratio of aDRP. We used multivariable Poisson regression to estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI). We analyzed 221 cases (patient age of 64.1 ± 9.0 years, 51.1% being female). On average, patients with SdT and SdT + add-on had 1.6 ± 1.3 and 1.6 ± 1.5 aDRP, respectively. Compared to the SdT group, SdT + add-on group did not have a higher number of aDRP (IRR = 1.11, 95%CI 0.87-1.43, p = 0.393) or likelihood of aDRP correction (IRR = 0.97, 95%CI 0.86-1.09, p = 0.578). We found the following factors to be associated with aDRP correction: unnecessary indication (IRR = 1.98, 95%CI 1.39-2.81, p < 0.001), missing indication (IRR = 1.93, 95%CI 1.68-2.21, p < 0.001), major-to-contraindicated drug interaction (IRR = 1.74, 95%CI 1.39-2.18, p < 0.001), adverse effects (IRR = 1.71, 95%CI 1.26-2.31, p < 0.001), nonconformity indication (IRR = 1.66, 95%CI 1.44-1.92, p < 0.001), and administration (IRR = 1.45, 95%CI 1.26-1.67, p < 0.001). In conclusion, adding antihypertensive agents was not associated with a higher number of aDRP or likelihood of aDRP corrections. Physician acceptance of aDRP corrections could be strongly related to unnecessary/missing indication, major-to-contraindicated drug interaction, and adverse effects. These findings could improve DRP alerts and maximize treatment outcomes in Asian patients with hypertension.
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.