title: Efficacy and compliance with cholestyramine bar versus powder in the treatment of hyperlipidemia.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of the study was to compare the powder and the bar forms of cholestyramine to determine efficacy and patient compliance.
  
  
  METHODS
  A prospective, randomized trial was conducted that included 83 healthy men and women with hyperlipidemia greater than the 90th percentile for low-density lipoprotein (LDL) or total cholesterol. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either cholestyramine powder, two packets (8 g), twice daily, or cholestyramine confectionery bar, in maple or mint flavors, two bars (8 g), twice daily. Fasting serum total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and triglycerides were measured at baseline, after 6 to 8 weeks of following the American Heart Association Step I diet alone, and after 8 weeks of taking either the cholestyramine bar or powder.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Total cholesterol decreased significantly (p less than 0.01) by 16% in the bar group and 17% in the powder group. LDL cholesterol decreased by 28% and 29% in the bar and powder groups, respectively (p less than 0.01). There was no significant change in HDL cholesterol. Triglycerides increased in both groups, by 29% in the bar group and by 25% in the powder group. There was no difference between bar and powder in the effect on blood lipids. The majority of the lipid-lowering effect was seen within 14 days. Mean patient endpoint compliance with the therapy was 91.8 +/- 3.6% in the bar group and 94.8 +/- 2.1% in the powder group. There was no difference between groups.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The cholestyramine confectionery bar is as effective as cholestyramine powder in the treatment of hyperlipidemia. The majority of the lipid-lowering effect is seen within 14 days of therapy. Although patient compliance is comparable between the two forms, gastrointestinal side effects were slightly greater with the bar form. Therefore, although the bar offers an alternative form of therapy, there appears to be no advantage with regard to patient compliance or palatability.
authors.affiliation: Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia 30322.
authors.forename: M E
authors.initials: ME
authors.lastname: Sweeney
authors.forename: B J
authors.initials: BJ
authors.lastname: Fletcher
authors.forename: C R
authors.initials: CR
authors.lastname: Rice
authors.forename: K A
authors.initials: KA
authors.lastname: Berra
authors.forename: C M
authors.initials: CM
authors.lastname: Rudd
authors.forename: G F
authors.initials: GF
authors.lastname: Fletcher
authors.forename: R S
authors.initials: RS
authors.lastname: Superko
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001835:Body Weight / Q000187:drug effects; D002784:Cholesterol / Q000097:blood; D002792:Cholestyramine Resin / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D004339:Drug Compounding; D005260:Female; D006439:Hemodynamics / Q000187:drug effects; D006801:Humans; D006949:Hyperlipidemias / Q000188:drug therapy*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010349:Patient Compliance; D011208:Powders; D011446:Prospective Studies
chemical_list: D011208:Powders; D002792:Cholestyramine Resin; D002784:Cholesterol