<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
With 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), the trough-to-peak (T/P) ratios (corrected for placebo) of atenolol 100 mg, cilazapril 2.5 mg, enalapril 20 mg and nifedipine-GITS 30 mg administered once daily for 4 weeks were determined in four groups of hypertensive patients. T/P ratios were calculated by three different methods: directly from the curves that averaged all individual 24 h profiles (A); averaging all individual T/P ratios after ABPM data were averaged for each patient over either 1 h intervals (B) or 3 h intervals (C). Methods B and C produced different values of T/P which, for each drug, were significantly higher with method C. With method A, nifedipine appeared to have the higher T/P. With methods B and C (which in contrast to method A, permitted statistical comparisons), differences between nifedipine and the other drugs were not significant. Meanwhile, method B appears to adhere most closely to FDA guidelines by taking more into account the interindividual variability of BP profile. Thus, we suggest that precise guidelines for measuring T/P on the basis of ABPM are needed, whereas for the comparison between drugs, both the mean value of the T/P and its variance must be determined.
Adult, Male, Hypertension, Humans, Female, Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory, Middle Aged, Antihypertensive Agents, Aged
Adult, Male, Hypertension, Humans, Female, Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory, Middle Aged, Antihypertensive Agents, Aged
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |