Current medical research and opinion
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial
Controlled trial of an elbow support ('Epitrain') in patients with acute painful conditions of the elbow: a pilot study.
A randomized, controlled, parallel-group study was undertaken to assess the clinical efficacy of a new elbow support ('Epitrain') compared with a standard elasticated tubular stockinette support ('Tubigrip') in 35 patients with acute painful elbow disorders. On entry, patients had a clinical examination, including measurement of the range of active and passive movement of the affected joint, and were allocated to one or other treatment group (19 to 'Epitrain', 16 to control). All patients were allowed to take 1g paracetamol up to 4-times daily if necessary for the control of pain. ⋯ The mean range of active joint movement improved from 80 degrees to 141 degrees in the 'Epitrain' group, but only from 83 degrees to 98 degrees in the control group (p less than 0.0002). Similar results were obtained for passive joint movement. Overall, 13 (68%) of the 19 patients in the 'Epitrain' group were described as 'cured' as compared with 2 (13%) of the 16 patients in the control group (p less than 0.02).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical Trial
A double-blind, long-term study of tizanidine ('Sirdalud') in spasticity due to cerebrovascular lesions.
A double-blind study was carried out in 30 patients suffering from spasticity due to cerebrovascular lesions to compare the long-term efficacy and tolerability of tizanidine hydrochloride with that of baclofen. A 2-week titration phase identified the optimum dose of tizanidine (max. 20 mg/day) or baclofen (max. 50 mg/day) in each patient. Patients were then treated with this dose for a 50-week maintenance phase. ⋯ Side-effects in the tizanidine group were mild and transient and no patients discontinued the study; in the baclofen group, 3 patients discontinued the study due to severe side-effects. However, both drugs were assessed as effective and fairly well tolerated in the long-term. Although there were no statistically significant differences between the two drugs, the global assessment of antispastic efficacy revealed a nearly significant difference (p = 0.057) in favour of tizanidine and the global assessment of tolerability was also in favour of tizanidine.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Etizolam in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder associated with depressive symptoms.
A double-blind study was carried out in 30 female patients with generalized anxiety disorders associated with depressive symptoms to compare the effectiveness and tolerability of etizolam and alprazolam. Patients were allocated at random to receive one or other drug at a dosage of 0.5 mg twice daily for 5 weeks. ⋯ Although there was no statistically significant difference between the two drugs, there was a trend for etizolam to be more effective in relieving anxiety somatization symptoms. Apart from moderate daytime drowsiness in a few patients, both drugs were considered to be extremely well tolerated.
-
Comparative Study
Metformin efficacy and tolerance in obese non-insulin dependent diabetics: a comparison of two dosage schedules.
A comparative open study of metformin unit doses of 500 mg and 850 mg was carried out in 64 obese, non-insulin dependent diabetics on 1.5 to 3 g metformin daily. Glycaemic response, blood lactate, plasma metformin concentrations and tolerance for metformin were assessed. ⋯ Seven patients (3 asymptomatic and 4 with background symptoms) became intolerant of the 850 mg regimen and required to return to the 500 mg dose regimen. After exclusion of patients intolerant of the 850 mg dose regimen (11%), the remaining patients noted no significant change in symptoms and 28% of all patients transferred to the 850 mg dose unit indicated an overall preference for this regimen.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Comparative analgesic efficacy and tolerability of ketorolac tromethamine and glafenine in patients with post-operative pain.
In a randomized, single-dose, double-blind, parallel comparative trial of analgesic efficacy, 96 adult patients received either 10 mg ketorolac tromethamine or 400 mg glafenine orally the morning after surgery if they requested pain relief medication. Each patient provided a baseline pain assessment and then received the assigned medication. Patients assessed pain intensity and pain relief and reported any adverse events in interviews held 30 minutes after drug administration and then hourly for 6 hours. ⋯ The differences in overall response were statistically significant (p = 0.017). Fourteen (30%) patients who received ketorolac tromethamine and 17 (35%) who received glafenine reported adverse experiences that began or seemed to worsen after administration of the study drugs. The most prominent were drowsiness and sleeping, both of which are common in post-surgical patients.