Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mass media release of medical research results

An analysis of antihypertensive drug prescribing in the aftermath of the calcium channel blocker scare of March 1995

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Disclosure of medical research results to the public creates tension between lay medical reporters and the medical profession.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the early effect of media attention on the risks associated with short-acting calcium channel blockers (CCBs) for treating hypertension after publication at a national meeting and following publication.

DESIGN: Time-series analysis of prescription claims data.

SETTING AND DATA SOURCE: National third-party pharmaceutical benefits manager.

PATIENTS: Employed or retired persons and their families, 18 years of age or older, receiving prescription benefits from 1 of 4 national companies that contracted with the pharmaceutical benefits manager exclusively for prescription drug coverage.

MEASUREMENTS: Prescription claims for antihypertensive drugs by fill date converted to a percentage of all cardiovascular drug claims. Data were grouped into weekly intervals before and immediately after the national release of negative information about CCBs on March 10, 1995 and following publication of the results on August 23, 1995.

RESULTS: The most prevalent antihypertensive drugs were diuretics (21% of cardiovascular prescription claims) and calcium channel blockers (19%). A 10% decline in prescriptions filled for CCBs occurred 4 weeks following the intense media attention. Only prescriptions for long-acting calcium channel blockers declined. Alpha-1-blocker prescriptions increased by approximately the same amount that prescriptions for CCBs declined, suggesting substitution of one drug for the other. Changes in diuretic or β-blocker prescriptions filled were not statistically significant. No immediate change in other cardiovascular drug classes occurred following journal publication.

CONCLUSIONS: Intense media publicity regarding a controversial study measurably and unpredictably changed prescription claims.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Definition of “Sole Contribution.” N Engl J Med. 1969;281:676–7.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Relman AS. The Ingelfinger Rule. N Engl J Med. 1981;305:824–6. Editorial.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Angell M, Kassirer JP. The Ingelfinger rule revisited. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:1371–3. Editorial.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW. Medical journals and society: threats and responsibilities. Intern Med. 1992;232:215–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Fletcher SW, Fletcher RH. Early release of research results. Ann Intern Med. 1991;114:698–700. Editorial.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Altman LK. The Ingelfinger rule, embargoes, and journal peer review. Part 1. Lancet. 1996;347:1382–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Altman LK. The Ingelfinger rule, embargoes, and journal peer review. Part 2. Lancet. 1996;347:1459–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Psaty BM, Heckbert SL, Koepsell TD, et al. The risk of incident myocardial infarction associated with anti-hypertensive drug therapies. Circulation. 1995;91:925. Abstract.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Psaty BM, Heckbert SR, Koepsell TD, et al. The risk of myocardial infarction associated with antihypertensive drug therapies. JAMA. 1995;274:620–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mittler B. Dangerous medicine. Forbes Mediacritic. 1995;3:72–8.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Shuchman M, Wilkes MS. Medical scientists and health news reporting: a case of miscommunication. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:976–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lenfant C. The calcium channel blocker scare. Lessons for the future. Circulation. 1995;91:2855–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Parmley WW. Sensationalism and the news media. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;26:836–7. Editorial.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Byrd J. Scared readers. The Washington Post. March 26, 1995:Final Edition C06.

  15. Colburn D. Controlling your high blood pressure; reports cause furor by linking some drugs to heart attack risk. The Washington Post. March 28, 1995:Final Edition Z10.

  16. Joint National Committee on the Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. The fifth report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC V). Arch Intern Med. 1993;153:154–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Raeburn P. Widely used blood pressure drugs may increase heart attack risk. The Associated Press. San Antonio. March: 10, 1995.

  18. King W. Risk cited for blood pressure drug—chances higher for heart attack. The Seattle Times. March 10, 1995:Final Edition B1.

  19. Kolata G. Heart attacks may have tie to drug type. The New York Times. March 12, 1995: Section 1;Late Edition 27.

  20. McGrath M. Heart attack blamed on halt in medication. Omaha World Herald. March 17, 1995:Sunrise Edition 14.

  21. Bier J. Blood pressure drugs’ risks downplayed. The Frenso Bee. March 15, 1995: Home Edition A1.

  22. Sulmasy DP. The impact of media coverage on practice. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11:62. Letter.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Furberg CD, Psaty BM, Meyer JV. Nifedipine: dose-related increase in mortality in patients with coronary heart disease. Circulation. 1995;92:1326–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. New analyses regarding the safety of calcium-channel blockers: a statement for health professionals. September 1, 1995. Available at: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/new/press/cutlrccb.txt. Accessed December 10, 2002.

  25. Raeburn P, Study says high doses of heart drug nearly triple death rate. The Associated Press. August 31, 1995.

  26. Altman LK. Agency issues warning for drug widely used for heart disease. The New York Times. September 1, 1995: Late Edition—Final 1.

  27. Bishop J. National Heart Institute warns against using high doses of blood pressure drug. Wall Street Journal. September 1, 1995: B6.

  28. Akaike H. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control. 1974;AC19:716–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Maclure M, Dormuth C, Naumann T, et al. Influences of educational interventions and adverse news about calcium-channel blockers on first-line prescribing of antihypertensive drugs to elderly people in British Columbia. Lancet. 1998;352:943–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. Major cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients randomized to doxazosin vs. chlorthalidone: the antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment to prevent heart attack trial (ALLHAT) JAMA. 2000;283: 1967–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lepor H, Auerbach S, Puras-Baez A, et al. A randomized, placebocontrolled multicenter study of the efficacy and safety of terazosin in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 1992;148:1467–74.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Gillenwater JY, Conn RL, Chrysant SG, et al. Doxazosin for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response multicenter study. J Urol. 1995;154:110–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Fawzy A, Braun K, Lewis GP, Gaffney M, Ice K, Dias N. Doxazosin in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia in normotensive patients: a multicenter study. J Urol. 1995;154:105–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Oxman AD, Thomson MA, Davis D, Haynes RB. No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. CMAJ. 1995;153:1423–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Entwistle V. Reporting research in medical journals and newspapers. BMJ. 1995;310:920–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Phillips DP, Kanter EJ, Bednarczyk B, Tastad PL. Importance of the lay press in the transmission of medical knowledge to the scientific community. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:1180–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Regenstrief Institute for Health Care, Indiana University School of Medicine, USA

    Margaret E. Brunt BSc (Pharm), MSc, MD, FRCPC, Michael D. Murray Pharm D, MPH, Siu L. Hui PhD, Joseph Kesterson MA, Anthony J. Perkins MS &  William M. Tierney MD, FACP

  2. the Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, USA

    Margaret E. Brunt BSc (Pharm), MSc, MD, FRCPC &  William M. Tierney MD, FACP

  3. Purdue University School of Pharmacy, USA

    Michael D. Murray Pharm D, MPH

  4. the Roudebush Veterans’ Affairs Medical Center, Indianapolis, Ind

    William M. Tierney MD, FACP

Authors
  1. Margaret E. Brunt BSc (Pharm), MSc, MD, FRCPC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael D. Murray Pharm D, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Siu L. Hui PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joseph Kesterson MA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anthony J. Perkins MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. William M. Tierney MD, FACP
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William M. Tierney MD, FACP.

Additional information

This study was funded under a research contract with Caremark, Inc. Caremark had no control over the hypotheses investigated or the conduct of the study. At the time of the study, Caremark was a third-party prescription service and had no links to a pharmaceutical company. Caremark had the right to review this manuscript for consideration of proprietary interests. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of Caremark, Inc. or those of the participating institutions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brunt, M.E., Murray, M.D., Hui, S.L. et al. Mass media release of medical research results. J GEN INTERN MED 18, 84–94 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20502.x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20502.x

Key words

Search

Navigation