| Title |
Treatment optimization of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and associated factors in Ayder Comprehensive Specialized Hospital: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-017-2820-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tesfay Mehari Atey, Tsegay Teklay, Solomon Weldegebreal Asgedom, Haftay Berhane Mezgebe, Gebrehiwot Teklay, Molla Kahssay |
| Abstract |
Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have morbidity and mortality benefits in heart failure. Failure to optimize treatment using these medications increases hospitalizations, worsens signs and symptoms of heart failure, and reduces the overall treatment outcome. Therefore, the main purpose of this study was to assess the practice of treatment optimization of these medications and associated factors. A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted on 61 ambulatory heart failure patients, recruited using a convenience sampling technique, from February 25 to May 24, 2016 at the cardiology clinic of Ayder Comprehensive Specialized Hospital. Descriptive, inferential and Kaplan-Meier 'tolerability' analyses were employed. All patients were taking only enalapril as part of their angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor treatment. According to the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline, about fourth-fifth (80.3%) of the patients were tolerating to the hypotensive effect of enalapril. The dose of enalapril was timely titrated (every 2-4 weeks) and was optimized for only 11.5 and 27.8% of the patients, respectively. Considering the tolerance, timely titration, and dose optimization, only 3.3% of the overall enalapril treatment was optimized. Multivariate regression results showed that the odds of having timely titration of enalapril for patients who were taking enalapril and calcium channel blockers were almost 20 times [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 21.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-383.16, p < 0.036] more compared to patients who were taking enalapril and β-blockers. A Log Rank Chi Square result showed a 19.42 magnitude of better toleration of enalapril (p < 0.001) for patients who were taking enalapril for more than 1 year compared to less than a year. This study provides a platform for assessment of the treatment optimization practice of enalapril, which remains the pressing priority and found to be poor in the ambulatory setting, despite a better tolerability to the hypotensive effect of enalapril. We call for greater momentum of efforts by health care providers in optimizing the treatment practice to benchmark with other optimization practices. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 20% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 March 2018.
All research outputs
#15,826,038
of 23,511,526 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#2,336
of 4,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,109
of 331,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#46
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,511,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,299 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.