Search

Objectives: To compare quality of life with the selective beta1-blocker bisoprolol and the thiazide diuretic bendrofluazide in patients with mild to moderate hypertension., Design and Setting: Multi centric, randomised, double-blind, two-way crossover study carried out at six general practice centres., Subjects: Eighty-one patients with newly diagnosed or previously treated hypertension, who had a mean diastolic blood pressure (BP) of 95-120 mm Hg after receiving placebo for 4-6 weeks., Interventions: In random order, patients received bisoprolol (5 mg once daily) or bendrofluazide (2. 5 mg once daily) for 8 weeks., Main Outcome Measures: Quality of life and antihypertensive effect., Results: Decrease in systolic/diastolic BP did not differ between bisoprolol (10 +/- 2/13 +/- 1 mm Hg) and bendrofluazide (9 +/- 2/11 +/- 1 mm Hg). Between bisoprolol and bendrofluazide neither in the intention-to-treat nor in the efficacy analysis any difference was found in quality of life variables, such as Health Status Index, somatic symptoms, anxiety, depression, total psychiatric morbidity, cognitive symptoms and hostility score. Compared to baseline the Health Status Index improved (P < 0.05) during bisoprolol. None of the other investigated quality of life variables changed compared to baseline. No patients dropped out during bisoprolol or bendrofluazide treatment. Although, the total number of reported adverse events appeared lower during bendrofluazide than during bisoprolol treatment, it is unclear whether drug related adverse events also differ between the two drugs., Conclusions: At equipotent antihypertensive dosages, the effect of an 8-week treatment on quality of life does not differ between the selective beta1-blocker bisoprolol and the thiazide diuretic bendrofluazide.

Quality of life with the selective beta1-blocker bisoprolol and the calcium channel blocker nifedipine as a retard formulation was compared in patients with essential hypertension. A multicenter randomized, double-blind, two-way, crossover study design was used. After a placebo run-in period (4-6 weeks), during which all antihypertensive therapy was withdrawn, 82 patients were randomized. During the active treatment periods (8 weeks each), patients received either bisoprolol once daily or nifedipine retard twice daily, using the double-dummy technique. A washout period (4-6 weeks) separated the treatment periods. Data at baseline (at randomization) and at the end of each treatment period were compared. Seventy-five patients completed the study. Blood pressure (168 +/- 2/103 +/- 1 mmHg) decreased (p < 0.001) similarly with bisoprolol (153 +/- 2/90 +/- 1 mmHg) and nifedipine (154 +/- 2/90 +/- 1 mmHg). Compared with baseline values, none of the quality of life variables investigated changed during bisoprolol or nifedipine retard use. Neither in the intention-to-treat nor the efficacy analysis were differences between bisoprolol and nifedipine found in quality of life variables, such as the Health Status Index, somatic symptoms, anxiety, depression, total psychiatric morbidity, cognitive symptoms, and hostility score. Only in the efficacy analysis did Health Status Index tend to be better (p = 0.055) during nifedipine intake when compared with bisoprolol. This trend was not present in the intention-to-treat analysis. The number of dropouts during bisoprolol (n = 2) and nifedipine (n = 3) treatment, and the number of patients reporting side effects (21% and 16%, respectively) did not differ (p = 0.64) between both treatments. It can be concluded that at equipotent antihypertensive dosages, an 8-week treatment period with the selective beta1-blocker bisoprolol or the calcium antagonist nifedipine as a retard formulation does not result in any difference in quality of life variables. It is not clear whether the trend of Health Status Index to become better during nifedipine intake, which was only found in the efficacy analysis and not in the intention-to-treat analysis, is of clinical relevance.