Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of diclofenac diethylamine 1.16% gel in acute neck pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

ABSTRACT: Neck pain (NP) is a common musculoskeletal disorder in primary care that frequently causes discomfort. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may be used to reduce neck pain and associated inflammation and facilitate earlier recovery. Topical diclofenac diethylamine (DDEA) 1.16% gel is clinically proven to be effective and well tolerated in acute and chronic musculoskeletal conditions, but until now no clinical data existed for its use in acute NP. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of DDEA 1.16% gel compared with placebo gel in acute NP.In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients with acute NP (n?=?72) were treated with DDEA 1.16% gel (2 g, 4x/day, for 5 days) or placebo. Efficacy assessments included pain-on-movement (POM), pain-at-rest (PAR), functional neck disability index (NDI) and response to treatment (decrease in POM by 50% after 48 h). Adverse events (AEs) were recorded throughout the study.The primary outcome, POM at 48 h, was statistically significantly lower with DDEA gel (19.5 mm) vs. placebo (56.9 mm) (p?

SUBMITTER: Predel HG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3847223 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of diclofenac diethylamine 1.16% gel in acute neck pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Predel Hans-Georg HG Giannetti Bruno B Pabst Helmut H Schaefer Axel A Hug Agnes M AM Burnett Ian I

BMC musculoskeletal disorders 20130821

<h4>Background</h4>Neck pain (NP) is a common musculoskeletal disorder in primary care that frequently causes discomfort. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may be used to reduce neck pain and associated inflammation and facilitate earlier recovery. Topical diclofenac diethylamine (DDEA) 1.16% gel is clinically proven to be effective and well tolerated in acute and chronic musculoskeletal conditions, but until now no clinical data existed for its use in acute NP. The aim of this stud ...[more]

PMID: 23964752

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDiclofenac diethylamine (DDEA) gel has demonstrated efficacy for treatment of ankle sprains in both the 1.16% four-times-daily (QID) and 2.32% twice-daily (BID) formulations. The objective of this study was to compare, for the first time, the efficacy of DDEA 2.32% gel BID and DDEA 1.16% gel QID.MethodsThis was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, active-controlled, parallel-group study conducted in China from October 2019 to November 2020, designed to determine the noninferiority of DDEA 2.32% gel BID relative to DDEA 1.16% gel QID for treatment of grade I-II ankle sprain. At study entry, patients must have had pain on movement (POM) ≥50 mm on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS), and not received any pain medication. The primary efficacy endpoint was the noninferiority of DDEA 2.32% gel BID vs DDEA 1.16% gel QID for POM as assessed by the patient using the 100-mm VAS, conducted on day 5. Secondary endpoints included measures of ankle tenderness, joint function, swelling, and patient-reported pain intensity and pain relief.ResultsA total of 302 patients were randomized and 95.4% completed the study. The mean (SD) change in POM from baseline to day 5 using the 100-mm VAS was - 42.8 mm (19.7 mm) with DDEA 2.32% gel BID and - 43.1 mm (18.1 mm) with DDEA 1.16% gel QID for the per-protocol population. The least squares mean difference (DDEA gel 2.32% - DDEA gel 1.16%) at this timepoint was 1.11 mm (95% CI - 3.00, 5.22; P = 0.595), and the upper limit (5.22 mm) of the 95% CI was less than the noninferiority margin of 13 mm, demonstrating that DDEA 2.32% gel BID was noninferior to DDEA 1.16% gel QID. Similar trends were seen for the secondary efficacy endpoints. There was no significant difference in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events or adverse events adjudicated as being treatment related. All treatment-related adverse events were dermatological; one patient discontinued from the DDEA 2.32% gel BID arm due to application-site inflammation.ConclusionsDDEA 2.32% gel BID offers a convenient alternative to DDEA 1.16% gel QID, with similar pain reduction and relief, anti-inflammatory effects, and tolerability.Trial registrationNCT04052620.

Project description:BackgroundIn prospective experimental studies of neck pain patients, it is difficult to determine whether responses to sham acupuncture differ from responses to real acupuncture due to the heterogeneous methodologies in control/sham interventions. Here we aim to compare the specific and nonspecific effects of electroacupuncture with four types of sham acupuncture.MethodsIn this double-blind, sham-controlled study, we randomly assigned 175 patients with neck pain to receive 10 sessions of electroacupuncture, shallow puncture, nonacupoint deep puncture, nonacupoint shallow puncture, or nonpenetration acupuncture. We used the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) as our primary outcome, and Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire, visual analog scale (VAS), and Pain Threshold as secondary outcomes to measure the changes from baseline to a 3-month follow up.ResultsAll groups, except nonacupoint shallow puncture, had significant improvement in all outcome measurements. Electroacupuncture only showed superior improvements than the shallow puncture, nonacupoint shallow puncture, and nonpenetration groups when compared using the NPQ and VAS scale (*p < 0.001). Interestingly, the nonacupoint shallow puncture produced even less placebo response than nonpenetration acupuncture.ConclusionOur study demonstrates the high variability of placebo response among different types of sham controls depending on the depth of needle insertion and the puncture location. An important implication of our results is nonacupoint deep puncture produced similar analgesic effects as electroacupuncture. Our study may shed a new light on the predominant underlying mechanisms among different types of sham acupuncture controls, which can help with interpreting the effect of acupuncture in other studies.Trial registrationChinese clinical trial registry (ChiCTR-IOR-15006886).SignificanceThis study compared the observed specific and nonspecific analgesia effect in four different types of sham acupuncture stimulation with neck pain patients, assessed by four outcomes. Although all of the sham controls produced significant reduction in neck pain, electroacupuncture had superior significant improvement. Importantly, placebo responses differed significantly between the sham controls and responses were inconsistent according to different outcome assessments. This study emphasizes the importance of taking into consideration which sham control and method of outcome measurement were used in a pain research study when evaluating its results.

Project description:IntroductionKnee osteoarthritis is a common form of arthritis in elderly patients that is characterised by pain and functional limitation. Moxibustion has been employed to relieve chronic pain as an alternative therapy for knee osteoarthritis. However, the evidence of its efficacy is equivocal due to the low methodological quality in most clinical studies. Therefore, we are performing a double-blinded, double-placebo, randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of moxibustion in participants with knee osteoarthritis.Methods and analysisThis is a multicentre, double-blinded, double-placebo, randomised controlled clinical trial. 144 eligible participants with knee osteoarthritis will be randomly assigned to two different groups in a 1:1 ratio. Participants in the moxibustion group will undergo active moxibustion plus placebo gel, whereas participants in the control group will receive diclofenac sodium gel plus placebo moxibustion. Each participant will receive 12 sessions of active/placebo moxibustion at three acupoints (ST35, ST36 and EX-LE4) as well as 2 months of follow-up. Diclofenac sodium gel or placebo gel at a dose of 4 g per knee will be applied three times per day for 4 weeks. The primary outcome measure will be the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score change at the end of the intervention period from baseline. The secondary outcome measures include changes of other subscales (pain, stiffness and function) of WOMAC, visual analogue scale and patient globalassessment. The safety of moxibustion and diclofenac sodium gel will be assessed at every visit.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has been approved by the Sichuan Regional Ethics Review Committee (permission number: 2015KL-014). The results of this study are expected to provide clinical evidence on the efficacy of moxibustion for pain relief and physical function improvement in patients with knee osteoarthritis. The findings will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented at relevant academic conferences.Trial registration numberNCT02769572.

Project description:PurposeLow-intensity continuous ultrasound (LICUS) is an emerging high-dosimetry ultrasound-based therapy for accelerated tissue healing and the treatment of myofascial pain. In this study, LICUS treatment is clinically evaluated for chronic upper neck and shoulder pain in a randomized, multi-site, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.Patients and methodsCONSORT guidelines were followed in conducting and reporting the clinical trial. Thirty-three participants with upper trapezius myofascial pain were randomized for treatment with active (n=25) or placebo (n=8) devices. Investigators and subjects were blinded to treatment groups. Participants self-reported pain daily, rating from 0-10 on the numeric rating scale. If pain rating was more significant than or equal to 3, the LICUS (3MHz, 0.132W/cm2, 1.3W, 4 hours) was self-applied for total energy dosimetry of 18,720 Joules per treatment. During the 4-week study, daily pain rating was recorded. If LICUS treatment was delivered, pain before, during, and after treatment were recorded as well as the global rate of change (GROC). Independent t-tests were used to assess change from baseline and differences between treatment groups. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02135094.ResultsThere was a 100% completion rate for participants enrolled in the study and no significant differences between the groups regarding demographic variables or baseline outcome measures. Participants treated with active therapy observed a significant mean pain reduction from baseline of 2.61 points for active (p<0.001), compared to 1.58 points decrease from baseline for placebo (p=0.087), resulting in a 1.03 points significant decrease in the active group over placebo (p=0.003). The total GROC was significantly higher in the active group at 2.84 points compared to the placebo group at 0.46 points (p<0.001).ConclusionLow-intensity continuous ultrasound treatment significantly reduced pain in patients with upper trapezius myofascial pain of the neck and shoulder. LICUS treatment showed a clinically meaningful improvement in the GROC scores for patients. The results from this clinical trial indicate that the LICUS treatment of 18,720 Joules can effectively be used to treat clinical pain related to upper trapezius myofascial pain. Further research could investigate varying dosimetry to improve efficacy and/or reduce the dose.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of diclofenac diethylamine 1.16% gel in acute neck pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Publications

Efficacy and safety of diclofenac diethylamine 1.16% gel in acute neck pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets