Comparison of the efficacy of betaxolol-brinzolamide and timolol-dorzolamide as suppressors of aqueous humor flow in human subjects.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of combinations of betaxolol-brinzolamide and timolol-dorzolamide as suppressors of aqueous humor flow and ocular hypotensive agents. DESIGN: Placebo-controlled, masked comparison of the two drug combinations. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five normal human volunteers with the fellow eye serving as control. METHODS OR TESTING: Fluorophotometric measurement of aqueous humor flow and pneumatonometric measurement of intraocular pressure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Aqueous humor flow and intraocular pressure. RESULTS: The betaxolol-brinzolamide combination lowered aqueous flow 39% to 44%, and the timololdorzolamide combination lowered aqueous flow 51%. The betaxolol-brinzolamide combination lowered intraocular pressure 14% to 19%, and the timolol-dorzolamide combination lowered it 18% to 24%. CONCLUSIONS: Both drug combinations were effective; the timolol-dorzolamide combination appeared to be the more effective of the two after short-term exposure (24 hours).

Effect of brinzolamide and dorzolamide on aqueous humor flow in human eyes.

PURPOSE: To measure the relative efficacy of brinzolamide hydrochloride 1% ophthalmic suspension, a new carbonic anhydrase inhibitor, compared with the currently used dorzolamide hydrochloride 2% ophthalmic solution as suppressors of aqueous humor flow in human eyes, and to study the difference of effect during the day and at night. METHODS: A randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled study of 25 normal human subjects was carried out at Mayo Clinic. The daytime rate of aqueous humor flow was measured every 2 hours from 8 AM to 4 PM by means of fluorophotometry. Likewise, the night-time rate of aqueous humor flow was measured every 2 hours from 12 AM to 6 AM. Intraocular pressure was measured at 4 PM and 6 AM. RESULTS: Brinzolamide reduced aqueous flow by 0.47+/-0.20 microl per min (mean+/-SD) during the day, whereas dorzolamide reduced flow by 0.34+/-0.20 microl per min. Brinzolamide reduced aqueous flow by 0.16+/-0.12 microl per min during the night, whereas dorzolamide reduced flow by 0.10+/-0.13 microl per min. Brinzolamide reduced afternoon intraocular pressure by 1.5+/-1.1 mm Hg, and dorzolamide reduced afternoon intraocular pressure by 1.1+/-1.0 mm Hg. Brinzolamide reduced the morning awakening intraocular pressure by 0.3+/-1.6 mm Hg, and dorzolamide reduced it by 0.8+/-1.0 mm Hg. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the idea that brinzolamide is at least as efficacious as dorzolamide as a suppressor of aqueous humor flow in normal human eyes and that there is probably not a clinically significant difference between the two drugs in this efficacy. Clinicians who prescribe brinzolamide should expect similar ocular hypotensive responses from brinzolamide and dorzolamide.

The family physician and house calls. A survey of Colorado family physicians.

BACKGROUND: Visiting patients at home has long been one of the activities of the family physician, but the practice of making house calls has diminished significantly during the second half of the 20th century. The goal of this study was to describe physicians' attitudes about house calls and their practice of making them in the rapidly changing health care environment of the United States. METHODS: A 30-item, self-administered questionnaire was designed to obtain demographic information about physicians and their attitudes toward house calls, practice experiences with making house calls, and any additional factors that influence making house calls. It was mailed to all members of the Colorado Academy of Family Physicians, during the summer of 1997. RESULTS: A 66% response rate was obtained from practicing physicians. Overall attitudes toward house calls were positive. Fifty-three percent of the respondents reported making house calls, and 8% reported making more than 2 house calls per month. Male physicians, those older than 40 years, those in rural settings, and those trained in a community-based residency were more likely to make house calls. Patient payer mix and practice setting were also related to whether a physician made house calls. House calls were most frequently made to geriatric patients, cancer patients, trauma patients, and patients with transportation difficulties. Many physicians reported using home health agencies for assessment and treatment of patients needing home care. CONCLUSIONS: Family physicians agree that house calls are good for patients. More than half of the respondents reported that they occasionally make house calls. However, few physicians routinely perform house calls.