CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 28Blood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

Effects of antihypertensive therapy on blood pressure control, cognition, and reactivity

Lasser, Norman L., Nash, John, Lasser, Vera I., Hamill, Sheila J., Batey, David M.·1989·The American Journal of Medicine
DOI 10.1016/0002-9343(89)90142-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to compare the effects of treatment with prazosin, propranolol, or hydrochlorothiazide on the following variables: blood pressure, cognitive and psychomotor skills, cardiovascular reactivity to natural and laboratory challenges, and serum lipid and lipoprotein levels. Side effects were recorded and patients evaluated how they felt during their treatment. Sixty-nine men, 35 percent black, aged 25 to 55 (mean 51.3) years, with diastolic blood pressures between 90 and 104 mm Hg (mean, 93.3 mm Hg), completed the study. There were no differences between active treatment groups in the proportion of patients with controlled blood pressure during the maintenance phase of the study. In the cognitive and psychomotor tests, the hydrochlorothiazide group showed significantly less improvement from baseline than the other treatment groups on the block design subscale of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised, and there was a trend for the propranolol group to have less improvement from baseline than the other groups on the digit span subscale. There were no other significant pretreatment to post-treatment changes in the other cognitive or psychomotor tests, the Russell Revision of the Wechsler Memory Scale, or a number of computerized reaction-time and signal-detection tasks. In the reactivity testing, there was a significantly lower increase in heart rate in the prazosin group compared with placebo during the second laboratory challenge of the Stroop Color Interference Test. Post-treatment declines in ambulatory blood pressure were seen in all of the drug treatment groups in average and maximal diastolic and systolic blood pressures. Both propranolol and hydrochlorothiazide treatment resulted in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels that were higher than baseline and the hydrochlorothiazide treatment had significantly increased total cholesterol levels. In contrast, the prazosin-treated group experienced no adverse changes in these parameters. Overall, the propranolol group had significantly more moderate and severe side effects than did the other three groups. Considering the pattern of blood pressure control, cognitive and psychomotor effects, changes in lipid levels, and magnitude of side effects, prazosin seems to have the most advantageous profile in this study of the three anti-hypertensive agents evaluated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0002-9343(89)90142-3

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The observed effect of propranolol on IAT was unlikely due to a general impairing effect of propranolol on cognitive performance.

    “it seems unlikely that the observed effect on IAT was due to a general impairing effect of propranolol on cognitive performance, given that previous research has demonstrated that propranolol and other beta blockers do not impair performance on purely cognitive conflict tasks, such as the standard Stroop test (Harvey et al. 1977; Lasser et al. 1989; Nakano etal. 1978).”

    From Propranolol reduces implicit negative racial bias (2012) · cites this paper as Lasser et al. 1989

  • Propranolol and other beta blockers do not impair performance on purely cognitive conflict tasks, such as the standard Stroop test.

    “previous research has demonstrated that propranolol and other beta blockers do not impair performance on purely cognitive conflict tasks, such as the standard Stroop test (Harvey et al. 1977; Lasser et al. 1989; Nakano etal. 1978).”

    From Propranolol reduces implicit negative racial bias (2012) · cites this paper as Lasser et al. 1989

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lasser, N. L., Nash, J., Lasser, V. I., Hamill, S. J., & Batey, D. M.
Affiliations
Rutgers New Jersey Medical School (US)
Venue
The American Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1989-01
Volume
86
Issue
1
Pages
98-103
ISSN
0002-9343 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/0002-9343(89)90142-3
OpenAlex
W1556387315
Cited by
28
References
23
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • The American Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
antihypertensive therapy, prazosin, propranolol, hydrochlorothiazide, blood pressure control, cognitive effects, psychomotor performance, cardiovascular reactivity, heart rate, serum lipids, LDL cholesterol, adverse drug reactions, mild hypertension, ambulatory blood pressure
MeSH terms
Antihypertensive Agents, Blood Pressure, Cognition, Heart Rate, Humans, Hydrochlorothiazide, Hypertension, Lipids, Male, Middle Aged, Prazosin, Propranolol, Reaction Time, Stress, Psychological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review