A survey of hypertensive practices at two community health centres in Cape Town.

BACKGROUND: Control of hypertension remains an elusive goal, but doctors' non-compliance with guidelines, patient attitudes and adherence to treatment, and poor delivery of care at clinics are important contributing factors. OBJECTIVES: To determine the overall quality of hypertensive care, and compliance with current hypertension guidelines at community health centres (CHCs) in the Western Cape. METHODS: Consecutive patients attending hypertension clinics at two CHCs were selected to participate. A questionnaire was designed to determine patient demographics, doctors' compliance with hypertension guidelines, factors leading to treatment non-adherence, and delivery of care. Accuracy of blood pressure (BP) recording was evaluated by comparing the clinic BP with that measured using an approved manometer. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-one patients were evaluated, 100 from CHC 1 and 61 from CHC 2. There was no difference in both control systolic and diastolic BP measured by the hypertension nurse (147.9 v. 144.8 mmHg, p = 0.45, and 89.3 v. 85.6 mmHg, p = 0.14) respectively. All clinic BP readings were recorded to the nearest 10 mmHg mercury. The difference in both systolic and diastolic BP > 10 mmHg between the clinic and control BP was significantly greater at CHC 2 than CHC 1 (28% v. 56%, p = 0.005, and 43% v. 64%, p = 0.007) respectively. Overall, 39.8% of patients had a systolic and diastolic BP < 140 and < 90 mmHg. The mean number of antihypertensive drugs was 2.4 per patient. The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and tricyclic antidepressants was high at both centres, and few patients underwent basic investigations, lifestyle interventions, risk stratification or global cardiovascular risk reduction. CONCLUSIONS: 39.8% of patients achieved a BP < 140/90 mmHg. There is significant scope for improvement in prescription of medication, application of uniform lifestyle changes, and avoidance of NSAIDs and tricyclic antidepressants. Major deficiencies were identified in BP measurement, assessment of target organ damage, risk stratification and the reduction of overall cardiovascular risk.

Effect of losartan versus candesartan on uric acid, renal function, and fibrinogen in patients with hypertension and hyperuricemia associated with diuretics.

BACKGROUND: Hyperuricemia may counter benefits of blood pressure (BP) reduction, although this is controversial. METHODS: We examined the effects of candesartan and losartan on uric acid, creatinine, and fibrinogen. Patients with hypertension and serum uric acid > or = 0.42 mmol/L (7 mg/dL) associated with diuretics were randomized to receive losartan 50 to 100 mg or candesartan 8 to 16 mg for 24 weeks. At randomization and after 24 weeks, systolic and diastolic BP, serum uric acid, creatinine, and fibrinogen were measured. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients were entered into the study (30 in the losartan and 29 in the candesartan group). Mean systolic and diastolic BP were reduced in the candesartan group, from 156 mm Hg at baseline to 132 mm Hg at 24 weeks, and from 90.9 to 80.8 mm Hg respectively, P < .0001), and in the losartan group from 150.3 to 132 mm Hg and from 89.6 to 77.6 respectively, P < 0001). Overall mean values of fibrinogen levels were again reduced from 4.39 g/L at baseline to 4.01 g/L at 24 weeks (P < .02). Mean values of serum uric acid in the losartan and candesartan groups were similar at baseline (0.44 and 0.46 mmol/L, respectively), but they were lower in the losartan group after 24 weeks (0.39 and 0.48 mmol/L, P = .01). Twelve patients (44%) in the candesartan group had a 10% increase in serum creatinine compared with four patients (14.2%) in the losartan group (P < .02). CONCLUSIONS: Candesartan and losartan lowered BP, but only losartan reduced uric acid. The lowering of fibrinogen in both groups may explain the reduction in stroke with angiotensin receptor blockers. The effect of persistent hyperuricemia on renal function requires further study.