ABSTRACT
Background: Objectives of the study was to study the effect of Azilsartan 40mg once daily versus Telmisartan 40mg once daily in patients with Grade I-II essential hypertension.Methods: A prospective study was conducted at MGM Medical college and Hospital which included 80 patients in each group with Grade I–II essential hypertension. The sex, age, presenting illness, and family history of the patients were recorded. Investigations such as blood sugar, urine analysis, kidney function test, lipid profile, and ECG were performed before starting the treatment. Any adverse effects during the treatment were noted. Blood pressure was recorded at baseline and during follow-up. One group received Azilsartan 40mg once daily and another group Telmisartan 40mg once daily. Patients were followed-up every week for 5 weeks.Results: Patients receiving Azilsartan 40mg and Telmisartan 40mg showed a significant fall (P <0.05) in systolic (SBP) at the end of fifth week, when compared to baseline and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) significant fall at fourth and fifth week. The difference in fall in SBP and DBP was insignificant between the groups, after first, second and third week (P >0.05). Adverse effects such as Nasopharyngitis, Upper respiratory tract inflammation, Gastroenteritis, headache, dizziness, and fatigue were reported with both drugs.Conclusions: Reduction of blood pressure with Azilsartan and Telmisartan was similar, but fall in blood pressure from baseline was highly significant in both groups.
ABSTRACT
Background: To study cost-effective and cost-benefit analysis of antibiotic prescription in patients who had enteric fever and was given intravenous ceftriaxone. Methods: This was a prospective observational study conducted in a tertiary care hospital. 200 patients who have been diagnosed with enteric fever and were prescribed ceftriaxone were studied and their prescriptions were analyzed. 5 brands of most commonly prescribed ceftriaxone injections were chosen to analyse costeffective and cost-benefit analysis. Our study showed that there was a major difference of prizes between generic and 5 most commonly prescribed brands of the same drug. Use of branded drugs was associated with increase cost of treatment and in many cases was responsible for failure to take complete treatment as prescribed by treating physician. Results: This Study was conducted on 100 patients, 68 males and 32 females, diagnosed with enteric fever. Out of these patients Maximum number of patients were seen between age group of 30-40 years (34) and minimum patients belonged to age group of more than 60 years (8). Analysis of prescriptions revealed that 80 patients were prescribed Branded drugs and 20% were prescribed generic drugs. Out of these 80 patients who were prescribed branded drugs most common 5 brands were studied. The analysis of the cost of single dose of inj ceftriaxone revealed that branded drugs were 3.12 % to 200.84 % more in comparison with generic IV ceftriaxone. Analysis of cost of 1 day of treatment with IV ceftriaxone 1gm revealed similar figures. Total cost of treatment was Rs 595 for generic drug and 1790 for branded drug with maximum MRP. The Analysis of patients who discountinued treatment before completion revealed that most of them belonged to Brand E (30%) and minimum number of patients belonged to Generic group (5%.Conclusion: The cost of most commonly prescribed branded drugs was significantly higher (3%-200%) than generic drug and prescribing branded drugs was associated with failure to take complete treatment as prescribed by treating physician.