
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Pharmacol.
Sec. Pharmacoepidemiology
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1580787
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Introduction: Internet hospitals have emerged as a vital approach for patients seeking treatment for hypertension, with a significant increase in antihypertensive medication prescriptions through these innovative models. However, prescribing characteristics and guideline concordance of these prescriptions remain unclear. This study aim to analyze the prescribing characteristics of Western medicine (WM) and Chinese patent medicine (CPM) for hypertension and assess their concordance with hypertension guidelines in Internet hospitals in China, providing insights for optimizing antihypertensive CPM management. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the Yinchuan Internet Medical Regulatory Platform covering 87 enterprise-led Internet hospitals in China from January 1, 2018, to March 31, 2021. Visits diagnosed with hypertension and prescribed at least one oral antihypertensive medication (either WM or CPM) were included. Guideline concordance was evaluated by comparing prescribed individual antihypertensive WM and CPM in Internet hospitals with international and Chinese hypertension guidelines recommendations. Statistical analyses included 2 descriptive statistics, association rule analysis, and guideline concordance assessment.Results: Among the 787,209 visits, 93.75% were prescribed WM alone, 4.72% CPM alone, and 1.52% a combination of CPM and WM. Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) (38.50%) was the most prescribed WM class, with nifedipine (19.67%) being the most common individual medication. Most prescriptions of antihypertensive WM were guideline-concordant. Among CPM prescriptions, only 181 (0.37%) included traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) syndrome diagnoses. Of the 38 prescribed antihypertensive CPM, only 7 were guideline-recommended. The most frequently prescribed CPM were Jiuqiang Naoliqing (17.67%), and Zhenju Jiangya tablet (14.74%), neither of which was recommended by the guidelines. The combinations of two CPM were frequently prescribed, but none of these combinations were recommended by guidelines. The most common dual CPM combination was Jiuqiang Naoliqing + Qiangli Dingxuan tablet/capsule (support 8.65%, confidence 0.44%).The prescribing characteristics of antihypertensive WM in Internet hospitals closely align with those in offline hospitals with relatively satisfactory guideline concordance. However, some issues persist in antihypertensive CPM prescriptions, including the lack of TCM syndrome differentiation, frequent prescription of non-recommended CPM, and duplicate therapies. Strengthening CPM management in Internet hospitals is essential for optimizing hypertension care.
Keywords: Hypertension, internet hospitals, Chinese patent medicine, Western medicine, prescribing characteristics, Guidelines concordance
Received: 21 Feb 2025; Accepted: 15 Apr 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Zhou, Liao, Zuo, Han, Meng, Lin, Liu and Hu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Jing Hu, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Capital Medical University, Beijing Institute of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary Material
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.