Active clinical trials for "Hypertension"

The ADAMPA study is a pragmatic randomized clinical trial which aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention based on self-monitoring and self-titration of medication in poorly controlled hypertensive patients 40 years and older. The total duration of the study is 3 years, with 6 months of enrolment and 1 year of follow-up to measure the primary endpoint (Difference in mean systolic blood pressure, in mmHg, between the intervention and control groups).

The purpose of this study is to evaluate AZORGA® Ophthalmic Suspension compared to COSOPT® Ophthalmic Solution for IOP-lowering efficacy in subjects with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.

Randomized, open label, single dose, 2-way crossover study to investigate the bioequivalence of a new fixed dose combination (FDC) tablet of nifedipine GITS and candesartan with the corresponding loose combination under fed conditions.

In this study the investigators will recruit hypertensive subjects with higher than average uric acid levels to test the effect of lowering uric acid with febuxostat on several measures as listed below. This will be a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study.

We aimed to identify clinical and vascular parameters of treated hypertensive patients who present beneficial effects of dark chocolate for one-week period on vascular function.

Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular and renal disease, and a leading cause of premature mortality worldwide. Early hypertension studies showed that treating elevated blood pressure (BP) reduces patients' risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. In subsequent research, patients achieved greater improvement in cardiovascular outcomes when their treatment was aimed at a moderate systolic BP target (<150mmHg) than at higher targets. Although observational data suggest that even lower BP targets may be beneficial, this has not been seen in randomized trials; instead, "intense" treatment of hypertension (i.e., to a target systolic BP <120mmHg) was found to have no effect on participants' risk for renal disease, cardiovascular disease, or all-cause mortality. One potential explanation for this apparent lack of benefit of intense BP targets is that the study protocols targeted reductions in clinic BP rather than ambulatory BP. Ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) allows for assessment of BP throughout the day and night. Of all the BP measurements, nighttime systolic BP appears to be the best predictor of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. Because recent trials assessing intense BP targets did not include ambulatory BP measurements, the effect of intensive treatment on nighttime BP is largely unknown. To address this important gap in knowledge, we will conduct ABPM in 600 participants as part of an ancillary study to the ongoing Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). The goal of the ancillary study is to evaluate the effect of intensive vs. standard clinic based BP targets on nighttime BP (primary outcome), as well as night/day BP ratio, timing of peak BP, 24hr BP, and BP variability (secondary outcomes). The SPRINT trial includes approximately 9250 participants at high risk for cardiovascular disease. The investigators hypothesize that intense targeting of clinic systolic BP does not lower nighttime systolic BP compared to a standard target.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether a commonly prescribed orally inhaled corticosteroid treatment will induce a clinically meaningful elevation in intraocular pressure, when administered to patients with ocular hypertension (OHT) or open-angle glaucoma (OAG). Based on the response to high-dose corticosteroids, this patient group is more likely than the normal population to demonstrate this adverse effect.

To evaluate Drug-drug interaction

Background: Non-adherence and medication errors are common among patients with complex drug regimens. Applications for smartphones and tablets are known to be effective for improving adherence but they have not been tested in elderly patients with such complex chronic conditions, their older age meaning they tend to have less experience with this type of technology. Objective: to design, implement and evaluate a medication self-management application for elderly patients taking multiple medications called ALICE with the intention of improving adherence and safe medication use. Methods: A single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted with a control and an experimental group (N=99) in Spain in 2013. The characteristics of ALICE were specified based on the suggestions of 3 nominal groups with a total of 23 patients and a focus group with 7 professionals. ALICE was designed for Android and iOS and to allow the personalisation of prescriptions and medical advice, showing images of each of the medications (the packaging and the medication itself) together with alerts and multiple reminders for each alert. The randomly subjects in the control group received oral and written information on the safe use of their medications and the experimental group used ALICE for three months. Pre- and post- measures included: rate of missed doses and medication errors reported by patients, Morisky Medication Adherence 4 items Scale scores, level of independence, self-perceived health status and biochemical test results of the patients. In the experimental group, data were also collected on their previous experience with information and communication technologies, their rating of ALICE and their perception of the level of independence they had achieved. The inter-group intervention effects were calculated by univariate linear models and ANOVA, with the pre- to post-intervention differences as the dependent variables.

The primary endpoint of this study is the percent difference between the VentriPoint Medical System (VMS) and cMRI for estimating the end diastolic and end systolic right ventricular volumes (RVEDV and RVESV) in subjects with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH). The trial will be defined as positive if the mean VMS-cMRI percent difference is <10% and >-10% at a 1-sided 0.025 statistical significance level for RVEDV and for RVESV, with no safety concerns for the VMS procedure.