PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

G Fowler

Publications and source records attributed to G Fowler.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1994

Colestipol at varying dosage intervals in the treatment of moderate hypercholesterolaemia.

1. Bile acid sequestrants such as colestipol are effective lipid lowering agents but have a poor reputation for tolerability particularly when administered at the originally recommended doses. We have investigated a low dosage regimen with varying dosage intervals in order to assess efficacy and tolerability. 2. This double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel group study was conducted to investigate the effect of varying administration schedules of colestipol (10 g daily), against placebo in reducing LDL cholesterol levels in patients with moderate hypercholesterolaemia on the American Heart Association step 1 diet. 3. Colestipol or matched placebo, was administered as 5 g twice daily (COL am/pm) or 10 g once daily in the morning (COL am) or evening (COL pm) at fixed times with meals. 4. All 98 patients who entered the initial 16 week dietary phase, subsequently entered the 12 week active treatment phase and were randomised to placebo or active treatment and to one of the three treatment schedules. Fasting lipid profiles were performed every 4 weeks during both phases. 5. All active treatments significantly reduced LDL and total cholesterol compared with placebo (COL am: 17% and 10%, COL pm: 18% and 10%, COL am/pm: 19% and 12% (P = 0.0001)). HDL cholesterol rose significantly with COL am (5% (P = 0.021)) and COL am/pm (7% (P = 0.002)) when compared with placebo while a marginal increase was seen with COL pm (4% (P = 0.063)). Colestipol tended to increase serum triglyceride concentrations but the changes were not significant.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMed1993

An international perspective on the cholesterol debate.

For the past 5 years there has been an intensive debate and a number of conflicting guidelines suggesting what general practitioners (GPs) should do to screen and manage hyperlipidaemia. At a WONCA seminar in Vancouver in 1992, policies and guidelines from Canada, the UK, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Hong Kong and the USA were reviewed. It was concluded that cholesterol policy and guidelines tend to be influenced more by political and economic factors than by evidence of health benefit. International guidelines for cholesterol screening and management would be of minimal value, as GPs would have to interpret the epidemiological evidence of benefit from lipid screening and lipid lowering strategy in the context of each patient to arrive at optimum management.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Relationship between blood pressure measured in the clinic and by ambulatory monitoring and left ventricular size as measured by electrocardiogram in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the additional diagnostic precision conferred by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring on clinic blood pressure measurement in evaluating the severity of isolated systolic hypertension. METHODS: The association between left ventricular size as determined by ECG voltages [R-wave voltages in lead V5 (RV5) and S-wave voltages in lead V1 (SV1)] and blood pressure as assessed by clinic measurements and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was studied in 97 elderly patients included in the placebo run-in phase of the Syst-Eur trial. The additional diagnostic precision conferred by ambulatory monitoring on clinic blood pressure measurements was assessed by relating the residual ambulatory blood pressure level to the ECG-left ventricular size. The residual ambulatory blood pressure level was calculated by subtracting the predicted ambulatory blood pressure level for each patient (using the linear regression equation relating both techniques for the group) from the observed ambulatory blood pressure. RESULTS: Clinic systolic blood pressure was on average 20 mmHg higher (P < 0.001) than daytime ambulatory blood pressure while diastolic blood pressure was similar with both techniques. The sum of SV1 + RV5 was significantly related to clinic systolic pressure (r = 0.25), and 24-h (systolic, r = 0.37; diastolic, r = 0.29), daytime (systolic, r = 0.30; diastolic, r = 0.19) and night-time (systolic, r = 0.33; diastolic, r = 0.28) ambulatory blood pressure levels. These findings were not affected by adjustment for gender, age and the body mass index. The sum of SV1 + RV5 was significantly related to the residual 24-h (systolic, r = 0.30; diastolic, r = 0.31), daytime systolic (r = 0.20) and night-time (systolic, r = 0.31; diastolic, r = 0.29) ambulatory blood pressure monitoring levels. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring adds to the diagnostic precision of clinic blood pressure measurement in assessing the severity of hypertension in this population. The ongoing side project on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the Syst-Eur study should establish whether these findings hold true for morbidity and mortality.

Aged↗
PubMed1993

Predictors of successful smoking cessation following advice from nurses in general practice.

At follow-up of 751 subjects receiving a brief nurse-administered anti-smoking intervention in general practice, 135 subjects (18%) reported stopping smoking, of whom 44 (6%) reported sustained cessation for one year. The demographic, social and attitudinal characteristics of these subjects were compared with 616 subjects who continued to smoke. The most important predictors of cessation were intention to stop (OR 5.1, 95% CI 2.1-12.0), personal rating of likelihood of cessation (OR 4.9, 95% CI 2.8-8.5), nurse rating of likelihood of cessation (OR 4.0, 95% CI 2.2-7.4), and smoking habit of partner (1.9, 95% CI 1.3-2.9). As practice nurses are able to distinguish likely quitters from those who are not motivated and less likely to succeed, it is important to decide whether it is more cost effective to target support at the motivated or to spend more time encouraging less motivated. The most challenging, but possibly the most rewarding, task is to try to reduce the high proportion of new ex-smokers who relapse. Although 41.1% (95% CI 28.1, 58.0) of those expressing a definite intention to stop smoking gave up, only 17.9% (95% CI 8.9, 30.4) achieved sustained cessation. However, as sustained cessation is strongly predicted by social variables, such as marital status and time spent in the company of smokers, preventing relapse may not be easy to achieve through medical intervention alone.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1993

A comparison of amlodipine with enalapril in the treatment of moderate/severe hypertension.

1. The safety and efficacy of amlodipine vs enalapril as monotherapy was evaluated in patients with moderate/severe hypertension (supine DBP 105-125 mm Hg, SBP 140-220 mm Hg). 2. After 2 weeks placebo treatment 31 patients were randomised by the technique of minimisation in an observer-blind study to receive once daily treatment with either amlodipine (15 patients) 5-10 mg, or enalapril (16 patients) 5-20 mg for 8 weeks. The study design concluded with 2 weeks placebo treatment. In addition to clinic measurements, home blood pressure monitoring (Copal UA-251) was performed during the study. 3. Clinic supine systolic blood pressure was reduced from 177 to 152 mm Hg (amlodipine) and 183 to 169 mm Hg (enalapril) (95% CI for the intergroup difference -22.1, 0.3, P = 0.06) after 8 weeks treatment. 4. Clinic supine diastolic blood pressure was reduced from 110 to 93 mm Hg (amlodipine) and 109-102 mm Hg (enalapril) (95% CI for the intergroup difference -17.7, -2.7, P < 0.01) after 8 weeks treatment. 5. Home blood pressure recordings confirmed these reductions in blood pressure. Although the reduction in blood pressure was greater for the amlodipine treated group, the differences between treatments were not statistically significant. 6. Both drugs were reasonably well tolerated. The adverse events occurring most frequently in the amlodipine group were headache (5), peripheral oedema (3), upper respiratory infection (3) and anxiety (2). The adverse events occurring most frequently in the enalapril treated patients were headache (6), dizziness (3) and upper respiratory infection (2).

Adult↗
PubMed1993

A comparison of amlodipine with enalapril in the treatment of isolated systolic hypertension.

1. The safety and efficacy of amlodipine and enalapril were compared in patients with isolated systolic hypertension (supine DBP < 95 mm Hg and supine SBP 160-200 mm Hg). 2. After 2 weeks treatment with placebo 31 patients were randomised by the technique of minimisation in an observer-blind study to receive once daily treatment with either amlodipine (16 patients) or enalapril (15 patients) for 8 weeks. The study design concluded with 2 weeks placebo treatment. In addition to clinic measurements, home blood pressure monitoring (Copal UA-251) was performed during the study. 3. Mean supine systolic blood pressure was reduced from 185 to 164 mm Hg (amlodipine) and 183 to 159 mm Hg (enalapril) (95% CI for the difference between the drugs -10.5, 15.3) after 8 weeks treatment. 4. Mean supine diastolic blood pressure was reduced from 86 to 80 mm Hg (amlodipine) and 88 to 80 mm Hg (enalapril) (95% CI for the difference between the drugs -4.9, 7.6) after 8 weeks treatment. 5. Home blood pressure recordings confirmed these reductions in blood pressure, although there was no significant difference between treatments for the reductions in blood pressure. 6. Both drugs were reasonably well tolerated. The adverse events occurring most frequently in the amlodipine group were headache (2), peripheral oedema (5) and palpitations (2). The adverse events occurring most frequently in the enalapril group were headache (2), peripheral oedema (2), palpitations (2) and dizziness (3).

Aged↗
PubMed1993

The haemodynamic effects of GR 32191, a thromboxane A2 receptor antagonist, in patients with renal artery stenosis and hypertension.

This study was designed to determine if GR 32191 a thromboxane A2 receptor antagonist, would lower blood pressure in patients with hypertension and renal artery stenosis. Eight patients with unilateral atheromatous renal artery stenosis and hypertension were studied in a double-blind, single dose, placebo controlled, crossover study. The results show that, GR 32191, given orally, in doses of 20 mg and 40 mg, does not reduce the blood pressure to any clinically important degree.

Aged↗
PubMed1993

James Mackenzie.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

History, 20th Century↗
PubMed1992

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in elderly patients with isolated systolic hypertension.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared clinic and ambulatory blood pressure measurement and the reproducibility of these measurements in older patients with isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). PATIENTS: Eighty-seven patients aged greater than or equal to 60 years with ISH on clinic measurement were followed in the placebo run-in phase of the Syst-Eur trial. METHODS: Clinic blood pressure was defined as the mean of two blood pressure readings on each of three clinic visits (six readings in total). Ambulatory blood pressure was measured over 24 h using non-invasive ambulatory blood pressure monitors. RESULTS: Daytime ambulatory systolic pressure was, on average, 21 mmHg lower than the clinic blood pressure, whereas diastolic pressure was, on average, similar with both techniques of measurement. In the 42 patients who had repeat measurements, clinic blood pressure levels nad the amplitude of the diurnal blood pressure profile (fitted by Fourier analysis) were equally reproducible. However, both were less reproducible than ambulatory blood pressure levels. The repeatability coefficients, expressed as per cent of near maximum variation (four times the standard deviation of a given measurement), were 52% and 45% for the clinic systolic and diastolic pressures, 56% and 42% for the amplitude of the diurnal profile, and 29% and 26% for mean 24-h pressures. CONCLUSIONS: In older patients with ISH, clinic and ambulatory systolic blood pressure measurements may differ largely: the prognostic significance of this difference remains to be elucidated. Furthermore, in these patients the level of pressure is more reproducible by daytime ambulatory blood pressure measurement than by clinic measurement.

Aged↗
PubMed1992

Motivational effect of cholesterol measurement in general practice health checks.

A randomized trial was conducted in five general practices in and around Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire to assess the motivational effect of cholesterol measurement on compliance with advice to reduce dietary fat intake and to stop smoking. The advice was given by practice nurses during health checks for cardiovascular risk factors. A total of 578 patients were recruited to the study and randomized into two groups. Both groups were given the same advice and were followed up after a median of three months, but the intervention group was also given immediate feedback on their cholesterol concentration. Follow up was completed for 88.2% of subjects, and those who were not followed up were assumed not to have changed their behaviour. The mean fall in total cholesterol at follow up was 0.11 mmol l-1 (95% confidence interval 0.03 to 0.18) in the intervention group who were told their cholesterol result and 0.02 mmol l-1 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.10) in the control group who were not. The proportion of smokers who were not smoking at follow up was 10.7% and 10.1% in the two groups, respectively. Patients in the intervention group with an initial total cholesterol level of 6.50 mmol l-1 or greater showed a mean fall of 6.2% in cholesterol level whereas those with an initial cholesterol level of less than 5.20 mmol l-1 experienced a mean increase of 3.6%, but as differences of this magnitude were also seen in the control group they probably reflect regression to the mean rather than an effect of knowledge of cholesterol level.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Attitude to Health↗
PubMed1991

Caffeine restriction: effect on mild hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects on blood pressure of modifying dietary caffeine intake in patients with mild and borderline hypertension by monitoring ambulatory and clinic blood pressure. DESIGN: Four way, randomised, crossover trial of four consecutive two week dietary regimens: normal diet, caffeine free diet alone, caffeine free diet with decaffeinated instant coffee, caffeine free diet with caffeinated instant coffee (instant coffee phases conducted double blind). SETTING: Hospital hypertension clinic, Scotland. PATIENTS: 52 patients (23 men; aged 26-67 years) with untreated borderline or mild hypertension (diastolic blood pressure 90-105 mm Hg) who normally drank a minimum of three cups of coffee daily. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean ambulatory blood pressure over 24 hours; mean morning, daytime, and night time ambulatory blood pressure; sitting clinic blood pressure at 1700; plasma caffeine concentration at 1700 on the last day of each regimen. RESULTS: Mean 24 hour ambulatory blood pressure was not different between regimens. There was no difference in blood pressure variability between regimens. During the caffeine free diet alone morning ambulatory diastolic blood pressure was higher (2.8 mm Hg) than during the caffeine free diet with caffeinated coffee. Mean sitting clinic systolic blood pressure was higher at 1700 (4.7 mm Hg) with a caffeine free diet than with the caffeine free diet with caffeinated coffee (p less than 0.05). Dietary compliance as assessed by plasma caffeine concentration was excellent. There was no significant correlation between plasma caffeine concentration and blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Drinking caffeinated instant coffee over a two week period does not adversely influence blood pressure in patients with borderline or mild hypertension; abstinence is of no benefit.

Adult↗
PubMed1991

A comparison of the chronic effects of oral xamoterol and enalapril on blood pressure and renal function in mild to moderate heart failure.

1. We compared the effects, after 3 weeks oral therapy, of xamoterol 200 mg twice daily and enalapril 2.5, 5 or 10 mg twice daily on home and clinic blood pressure, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and renal plasma flow, stroke and minute distances, linear resistance and on plasma renin activity in 19 patients with mild to moderate heart failure in a single-blind randomised crossover study. 2. Enalapril reduced mean home blood pressure by 17/7 mm Hg compared with xamoterol (P less than 0.0001) and by 19/7 mm Hg compared with placebo. Compared with placebo xamoterol had no effect. Enalapril reduced predose blood pressure, compared with xamoterol, on average by 15/5 mm Hg (P = 0.02 systolic, 0.09 diastolic) and by 20/7 mm Hg compared with placebo. At 4 h post-dose the mean differences were: xamoterol-enalapril 13/10 mm Hg (P = 0.01 systolic, 0.0007 diastolic) and placebo-enalapril 23/9 mm Hg. 3. Stroke and minute distances were marginally less 4 h following xamoterol than following enalapril: mean (s.e. mean) values were 9.4 (0.7) vs 10.4 (0.8) cm (P = 0.23) and 699 (51.7) vs 767 (62.1) cm (P = 0.04) respectively. Linear resistance was reduced by enalapril, from the placebo value of 13.2 (1.2) to 11.0 (0.9) mm Hg m-1 and marginally increased by xamoterol, to 14.2 (1.2) mm Hg m-1, the difference between active treatments being statistically significant (P = 0.03). 4. Renal plasma flow, GFR and filtration fraction were not influenced by enalapril or xamoterol therapy. There were no significant correlations between glomerular filtration rate and either blood pressure or stroke distance.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adrenergic beta-Agonists↗