Dataset Information

Onset of analgesia by a topically administered flurbiprofen lozenge: a randomised controlled trial using the double stopwatch method.

ABSTRACT: Background:The double stopwatch (DSW) method for determining the onset of analgesic activity has been implemented extensively by investigators studying orally administered drugs. Objective:The aim of this randomised, placebo-controlled trial was to use the DSW method to determine the time to onset of analgesia of a single dose of a topically administered non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, flurbiprofen 8.75?mg lozenge. Methods:Adults with acute sore throat (n?=?122) were examined to confirm the presence of tonsillopharyngitis (Tonsillo-Pharyngitis Assessment) and sore throat pain of at least moderate intensity (?6 on a 0-10 Sore Throat Scale). Lozenges containing flurbiprofen 8.75?mg or inert ingredients (identically flavoured) were administered under double-blind conditions in the clinic while patients assessed pain and pain relief over 3?hours. Onset of analgesia was determined using the DSW method and reported as the Kaplan-Meier median time to meaningful relief. The median time to first perceived relief was also documented. Results:About 78% of flurbiprofen-treated patients reported meaningful pain relief compared with 48% of placebo-treated patients (p?

SUBMITTER: Schachtel B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6194974 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Onset of analgesia by a topically administered flurbiprofen lozenge: a randomised controlled trial using the double stopwatch method.

Schachtel Bernard B Aspley Sue S Shephard Adrian A Schachtel Emily E Lorton Mary Beth MB Shea Tim T

British journal of pain 20180125 4

<h4>Background</h4>The double stopwatch (DSW) method for determining the onset of analgesic activity has been implemented extensively by investigators studying orally administered drugs.<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this randomised, placebo-controlled trial was to use the DSW method to determine the time to onset of analgesia of a single dose of a topically administered non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, flurbiprofen 8.75 mg lozenge.<h4>Methods</h4>Adults with acute sore throat (n = 122) were ...[more]

PMID: 30349694

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPost-caesarean section analgesia is important physiologically and psychologically for both mothers and infants. Patient-controlled analgesia is a well-established method of administering opioids for postoperative pain. However, to date, no study has systematically investigated the effects of opioids administered through intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IVPCA) or patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) in parturients who have undergone caesarean section.MethodsThis systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the analgesic and adverse effects of opioids administered via IVPCA or PCEA in parturients who have undergone a caesarean section. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception through 02 10, 2022 for relevant records. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared opioids administered via IVPCA or PCEA and reported outcomes of interest were included. Studies were excluded if the solution for patient-controlled analgesia contained antiemetics and/or other analgesics in addition to opioids. The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Summary data were extracted from each eligible study. The primary outcome was pain intensity, and the secondary outcomes were opioid-related adverse effects. Frequentist network meta-analyses were performed using a contrast-based random-effects model. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021254040.FindingsTwenty-three studies with 2589 parturients were included. Compared with IVPCA morphine as a reference treatment, PCEA fentanyl had better analgesic effects at 4 h (mean difference [MD] in the visual analogue scale score, -0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] [-1.16, -0.34]) and 8 h (MD, -0.93; 95% CI [-1.57, -0.28]) and yielded lower odds of developing nausea/vomiting (odds ratio [OR], 0.27; 95% CI [0.09, 0.80]) and sedation/drowsiness (OR, 0.22; 95% CI [0.11, 0.45]). However, PCEA fentanyl may be more likely to cause pruritus than IVPCA treatments.InterpretationConsidering the analgesic efficacy; opioid-induced nausea, vomiting, and sedation; and the well-being of breastfed infants, PCEA fentanyl may be the treatment of choice for post-caesarean section analgesia.FundingThe Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation (TCRD-TPE-111-27).

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To determine women's satisfaction with pain relief using patient controlled analgesia with remifentanil compared with epidural analgesia during labour. DESIGN:Multicentre randomised controlled equivalence trial. SETTING:15 hospitals in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS:Women with an intermediate to high obstetric risk with an intention to deliver vaginally. To exclude a clinically relevant difference in satisfaction with pain relief of more than 10%, we needed to include 1136 women. Because of missing values for satisfaction this number was increased to 1400 before any analysis. We used multiple imputation to correct for missing data. INTERVENTION:Before the onset of active labour consenting women were randomised to a pain relief strategy with patient controlled remifentanil or epidural analgesia if they requested pain relief during labour. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcome was satisfaction with pain relief, measured hourly on a visual analogue scale and expressed as area under the curve (AUC), thus providing a time weighted measure of total satisfaction with pain relief. A higher AUC represents higher satisfaction with pain relief. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity scores, mode of delivery, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. Analysis was done by intention to treat. The study was defined as an equivalence study for the primary outcome. RESULTS:1414 women were randomised, of whom 709 were allocated to patient controlled remifentanil and 705 to epidural analgesia. Baseline characteristics were comparable. Pain relief was ultimately used in 65% (447/687) in the remifentanil group and 52% (347/671) in the epidural analgesia group (relative risk 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 1.48). Cross over occurred in 7% (45/687) and 8% (51/671) of women, respectively. Of women primarily treated with remifentanil, 13% (53/402) converted to epidural analgesia, while in women primarily treated with epidural analgesia 1% (3/296) converted to remifentanil. The area under the curve for total satisfaction with pain relief was 30.9 in the remifentanil group versus 33.7 in the epidural analgesia group (mean difference -2.8, 95% confidence interval -6.9 to 1.3). For who actually received pain relief the area under the curve for satisfaction with pain relief after the start of pain relief was 25.6 in the remifentanil group versus 36.1 in the epidural analgesia group (mean difference -10.4, -13.9 to -7.0). The rate of caesarean section was 15% in both groups. Oxygen saturation was significantly lower (SpO2 <92%) in women who used remifentanil (relative risk 1.5, 1.4 to 1.7). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable between both groups. CONCLUSION:In women in labour, patient controlled analgesia with remifentanil is not equivalent to epidural analgesia with respect to scores on satisfaction with pain relief. Satisfaction with pain relief was significantly higher in women who were allocated to and received epidural analgesia. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Netherlands Trial Register NTR2551.

Project description:BackgroundVery late (aged ≥60 years) onset schizophrenia-like psychosis occurs frequently but no placebo-controlled, randomised trials have assessed the efficacy and risks of antipsychotic treatment. We investigated whether low-dose amisulpride (100 mg daily) is superior to placebo in reducing psychosis symptoms over 12 weeks and whether any benefit is maintained by continuing treatment after 12 weeks.MethodsThe ATLAS double-blind controlled trial enrolled participants from 25 old age psychiatry services in the UK. Eligible participants (ie, those with a diagnosis of very late-onset schizophrenia-like psychosis and a Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [BPRS] score of ≥30, without cognitive impairment) were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to one of three groups in a two-stage trial: amisulpride in stage 1 and 2 (group A), amisulpride then placebo (group B), or placebo then amisulpride (group C). Treatment (100 mg oral amisulpride daily vs placebo) was given for 12 weeks in stage 1 and, initially, 24 weeks then reduced to 12 weeks in stage 2. Participants, investigators, and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. Primary outcomes were psychosis symptoms assessed by the BPRS at 4, 12, and 24, or 36 weeks, and trial treatment discontinuation for non-efficacy. The primary, secondary, and safety endpoints were all analysed in participants given at least one dose of study treatment in modified intention-to-treat analyses. This study is registered with EudraCT, number 2010-022184-35, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN45593573.FindingsBetween Sept 27, 2012, and June 28, 2016, we recruited 101 participants. 92 (91%) of 101 participants took trial medication, of whom 59 (64%) completed stage 1 and 34 (58%) of these 59 participants completed stage 2 treatment. Despite suboptimal compliance, improvements in BPRS scores at 12 weeks were 7·7 points (95% CI 3·8-11·5, p=0·0002) greater with amisulpride (mean 11·9 points [SE 1·3]) than with placebo (4·2 points [1·0]). In stage 2, BPRS scores improved by a mean of 1·1 points (1·6) from 12 weeks to the final assessment in those who continued amisulpride but deteriorated by 5·2 points (2·0) in those who switched from amisulpride to placebo (difference 6·3 points [95% CI 0·9-11·7], p=0·024). Fewer participants who were allocated amisulpride than placebo stopped treatment because of non-efficacy in stage 1 (p=0·010) and stage 2 (p=0·031). Serious adverse events were reported more frequently in the amisulpride group than in the placebo group in stage 1 (p=0·057) and stage 2 (p=0·19). The most common serious adverse events were infection (five patients in the amisulpride group, three in the placebo group) and extrapyramidal side-effects (three patients in the amisulpride group, none in the placebo group). Five patients died during the study, one from a gastric ulcer bleed before treatment started (group B), two while taking stage 2 treatment (one in group A and one in group C), and two who stopped trial treatment in stage 1 and died many weeks later (one in group B and one in group C). No deaths were related to treatment.InterpretationLow-dose amisulpride is effective and well tolerated as a treatment for very late-onset schizophrenia-like psychosis, with benefits maintained by prolonging treatment.FundingUK National Institute for Health Research.

Dataset Information

Onset of analgesia by a topically administered flurbiprofen lozenge: a randomised controlled trial using the double stopwatch method.

Publications

Onset of analgesia by a topically administered flurbiprofen lozenge: a randomised controlled trial using the double stopwatch method.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets