硝苯地平与氨氯地平治疗72例原发性高血压的临床疗效对比评价

Effect comparison of Nifedipine and Amlodipine in treatment of primary hypertension

目的对比评价硝苯地平与氨氯地平治疗72例原发性高血压的临床疗效。方法将72例原发性高血压患者纳入本次研究,以随机的方式分为两组,观察组36例采取氨氯地平治疗,对照组36例采取硝苯地平治疗,对比两组患者治疗前后血压变化情况、临床疗效以及不良反应发生情况。结果 1与治疗前相比,两组血压(包括舒张压与收缩压)均有明显改善(P<0.05);但治疗后两组血压改善效果无明显差异(P>0.05)。2在治疗总有效率方面,观察组与对照组分别为94.44%、80.56%;观察组治疗总有效率明显高于对照组(P<0.05)。3在不良反应发生率方面,观察组与对照组分别为5.56%、16.67%;观察组不良反应发生率明显低于对照组(P<0.05)。结论虽然硝苯地平与氨氯地平均能够使原发性高血压患者血压得到有效控制;但在临床疗效方面,采取氨氯地平治疗更高,在不良反应发生率则更低;因此,值得采纳应用。

Objective To evaluate the clinical effect of nifedipine and amlodipine in the treatment of 72 cases of primary hypertension. Methods Totally 72 patients with primary hypertension patients were included in the study,and divided into two groups in a random manner,observe group（ n = 36） take amlodipine treatment,the control group（ n = 36）take nifedipine therapy,compared two groups of patients before and after blood pressure changes,clinical efficacy and adverse reactions occur. Results 1Compared with before treatment,two groups of blood pressure（ including diastolic pressure and systolic pressure） were significantly improved（ P 0. 05）; But no significant difference in blood pressure between the two groups after treatment（ P 0. 05）. 2 In the total effective rate of treatment,the observation group and the control group were 94. 44%,80. 56%; The total effective rate of observation group was significantly higher than that in control group（ P 0. 05）. 3 In the incidence of adverse reactions,the observation group and the control group were5. 56% and 16. 67% respectively; The incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was significantly lower than that of the control group（ P 0. 05）. Conclusion Although nifedipine and amlodipine on average result in primary hypertension has been effectively controlled; But in the clinical curative effect,take amlodipine treatment more high,the adverse reaction incidence rate is lower; Therefore,it is adopted.