门诊两种降压药物短期降压疗效与不良反应的对比

Comparison of short-term antihypertensive efficacy and adverse reactions of two antihypertensive drugs in outpatient clinic

目的探讨门诊两种降压药物短期降压疗效与不良反应的对比。方法 150例原发性高血压患者,依据治疗药物的不同分为对照组和观察组,每组75例。对照组采用氨氯地平治疗,观察组采用厄贝沙坦治疗。比较两组患者的临床疗效、血压水平以及不良反应。结果观察组治疗总有效率为84.00%,略高于对照组的81.33%,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者治疗后的收缩压和舒张压均优于治疗前,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。治疗后两组收缩压、舒张压水平比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。观察组头晕头痛、嗜睡、乏力等不良反应发生率(9.33%)明显低于对照组(20.00%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论厄贝沙坦与氨氯地平治疗原发性高血压效果相当,不良反应较为轻微,是临床理想的一线用药。

Objective To compare the short-term antihypertensive efficacy and adverse reactions of two antihypertensive drugs in outpatient clinic. Methods A total of 150 essential hypertension patients were divided by different treatment drugs into control group and observation group, with 75 cases in each group. The control group was treated with amlodipine, and the observation group was treated with irbesartan. Comparison were made on clinical efficacy, blood pressure level and adverse reactions between two groups. Results The observation group had little higher total treatment effective rate as 84.00% than 81.33% in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05). Both groups had better systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure than before treatment, and their difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). Both groups had no statistically significant difference in systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure after treatment(P>0.05). The observation group had obviously lower incidence of adverse reactions of dizziness headache, drowsiness, fatigue(9.33%) than the control group(20.00%), and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). Conclusion Irbesartan and amlodipine provides equal effect in treating essential hypertension patients with slight adverse reactions, and it is ideal first-line medication in clinic.