Clinical and Experimental Hypertension (Feb 2020)

Antihypertensive treatment for hypertensive patients with heart failure using real-world Japanese data: subanalysis of the Retrospective study of antihypertensives for lowering blood pressure (REAL) study

  • Mitsuru Ohishi,
  • Takuo Yoshida,
  • Nobuhiro Nishigaki,
  • Akinori Oh,
  • Yukio Shimasaki

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/10641963.2019.1590384
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 42, no. 2
pp. 139 – 145

Abstract

Read online

The number of patients with heart failure (HF) is rapidly increasing. Although hypertension is related to onset of HF, antihypertensive treatment status for these patients has not been fully examined. We conducted a claims-based study to discern the treatment status of Japanese hypertensive patients with HF. Two Japanese databases (2008–2016) from acute care hospitals and health insurance societies were used to analyze prescription rates for antihypertensive drug class or category of diuretics in all hypertensive patients and the subset of patients with HF. Totals of hypertensive patients and those with HF in each database in 2015 were 4,191,666 and 1,404,008 patient-months, and 1,382,732 and 148,194 patient-months, respectively. In the acute care hospitals database, calcium channel blockers (CCBs) (55.0–56.5%) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (49.4–54.7%) were prescribed most. β-blockers (38.7–48.0%) and diuretics (42.3–45.6%) were prescribed more for hypertensive patients with HF than for all hypertensive patients (21.5–24.8% and 25.5–26.7%, respectively). Loop diuretics were also prescribed more often for hypertensive patients with HF (68.3–76.0% from acute care hospitals and 47.8–55.8% from health insurance societies) than for all hypertensive patients (56.7–61.7% and 16.4–18.3%). The size of medical institution had a greater effect on drug selection than patient age in both patient groups. Given recommendations in guidelines for hypertensive patients with HF, the differences in drug choice in comparison with all hypertensive patients appear reasonable. However, some deviations, such as the high rate of CCBs in frontline and preference for angiotensin II receptor blockers over angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, did not appear to follow guidelines.

Keywords