Efficacy of Nimodipine in Comparison with Pizotifen in the Prophylaxis of Migraine

Cephalalgia ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Havanka-Kanniainen ◽  
E Hokkanen ◽  
V V Myllylä
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Therapeutic Efficacy ◽  
Effective Drug ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Placebo Period ◽  
Drug Treatments ◽  
Better Than

The efficacy of nimodipine in comparison with that of pizotifen was assessed in the prophylaxis of migraine in a double-blind cross-over study, in which a double-dummy technique was also utilized. The study was carried out on 43 migraine patients, of whom 15 had classic and 28 had common migraine. A 4-week run-in placebo period preceded the drug treatments, the drug treatments lasted 12 weeks, and there was a washout placebo period of 4 weeks between nimodipine and pizotifen treatments. The dosages used were 40 mg three times daily for nimodipine and 0.5 mg three times daily for pizotifen. Both nimodipine and pizotifen proved to be better than placebo, the number of migraine attacks showing a significant reduction. There was no difference between nimodipine. and pizotifen in antimigrainous efficacy, but there were fewer side effects during the nimodipine period. The results suggest that nimodipine is an effective drug for the prophylaxis of migraine, with few side effects and therapeutic efficacy equal to that of pizotifen.

Nefazodone and Imipramine in Major Depression: A Placebo-Controlled Trial

1994 ◽  
Vol 164 (6) ◽  
pp. 802-805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl Rickels ◽  
Edward Schweizer ◽  
Cathryn Clary ◽  
Ira Fox ◽  
Charles Weise
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Major Depression ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Antidepressant Efficacy ◽  
Drug Treatments ◽  
Drop Outs ◽  
Hamilton Rating Scale ◽  
Better Than

Nefazodone is a phenylpiperazine antidepressant with 5-HT2 antagonism and 5-HT reuptake inhibition. Two hundred and eighty-three out-patients with a diagnosis of DSM–III–R major depression of at least one-month duration (65% ill for over 6 months), and a mean score of 24 on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD), were randomised to treatment with nefazodone, imipramine, or placebo. The double-blind treatment period was 8 weeks in duration. Nefazodone's antidepressant efficacy was comparable with imipramine's, with both drug treatments significantly better than placebo in a variety of outcome measures. For example, after 8 weeks of therapy, 78% of nefazodone and 83% of imipramine but only 55% of placebo patients (P < 0.01) were globally much or very much improved. Nefazodone was better tolerated than imipramine, with fewer drop-outs and a lower incidence of side-effects during treatment.

Efficacy of Nimodipine in the Prophylaxis of Migraine

Cephalalgia ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Havanka-Kanniainen ◽  
E Hokkanen ◽  
VV Myllylä
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Drug Treatment ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Final Value ◽  
Prophylactic Drug ◽  
Better Than

The efficacy of nimodipine in the prophylaxis of migraine was assessed in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study carried out on 33 patients, 20 of whom suffered from classic and 13 from common migraine. Four patients dropped out, but not as a result of the side effects of the drug. The duration of drug treatment was 8 weeks. The dosage used was 30 mg four times daily. Nimodipine proved to be better than placebo, the number of migraine attacks and severity of headache showing a significant reduction. The drug was well tolerated and no marked side effects were noted. The results suggest that nimodipine is a useful new prophylactic drug for migraine, but further studies are needed before its final value can be evaluated.

A Controlled Trial of Baclofen in Children with Cerebral Palsy

1973 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 398-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
P J Milla ◽  
A D M Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Cerebral Palsy ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Dose Reduction ◽  
Crossover Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Drug Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Muscle Spasticity ◽  
Children With Cerebral Palsy ◽  
Better Than

A double-blind crossover trial against placebo was conducted to assess the effects of the GABA derivative, baclofen, on the disabilities due to muscle spasticity in twenty children suffering from cerebral palsy. Baclofen performed very significantly better than placebo in reducing spasticity and significantly better than placebo in allowing both active and passive limb movements to be carried out. Notable improvement was also seen in scissoring. Side-effects were minimal and responded promptly to dose reduction. The evaluation of drug effects on muscle spasticity and the pharmacodynamics of baclofen are discussed. Recommendations are made regarding dosage of baclofen in childhood.

Tolfenamic Acid, Metoclopramide, Caffeine and Their Combinations in The Treatment of Migraine Attacks

Cephalalgia ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riitta A Tokola ◽  
Pentti Kangasniemi ◽  
Pertti J Neuvonen ◽  
Olavi Tokola
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Clinical Studies ◽  
Tolfenamic Acid ◽  
Acute Migraine ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Better Than

Tolfenamic acid is a fenamate which inhibits prostaglandin (PG) biosynthesis and may act as a PG antagonist as well. Caffeine and metoclopramide are used in combination with analgesics and ergotamine in the treatment of migraine attacks, but controlled clinical studies on fixed combinations with analgesics are rare. The effects of orally given tolfenamic acid (200 mg), caffeine (100 mg), metoclopramide (10 mg), tolfenamic acid + caffeine (200 mg + 100 mg), tolfenamic acid + metoclopramide (200 mg + 10 mg) and placebo were studied in 49 migraine patients (3 men, 46 women) in a double-blind randomized cross-over study comprising 482 migraine attacks. The patients were allowed to take either one or two capsules of each preparation for an attack. Additional drugs were allowed after 3 h. Parameters characterizing the effects and side-effects of the drugs were registered. Tolfenamic acid and its combinations were found to be effective in the treatment of acute migraine, but caffeine and metoclopramide alone did not differ from placebo. Combination with metoclopramide was better than tolfenamic acid alone as judged by the smaller dose needed and the intensity of attack. Between tolfenamic acid alone and its caffeine combination there were no statistically significant differences.

A Clinical Comparison of Triazolam with Placebo and with Secobarbital in Insomniac Patients

1978 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Kay Okawa ◽  
George S Allen
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Sleep Duration ◽  
Sleep Onset ◽  
Questionnaire Data ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Sleep Questionnaire ◽  
Clinical Comparison ◽  
Hypnotic Efficacy ◽  
Better Than

Seventy-six out-patient insomniacs participated in three different two-night, double-blind crossover trials investigating the hypnotic efficacy and safety of triazolam. Triazolam 0.5 mg was compared to placebo in one trial conducted by K Kay Okawa, MD, and triazolam 0.5 mg was compared to secobarbital 100 mg in trials conducted by K Kay Okawa, MD and George S Allen, MD. The results of the latter two studies were combined and the data analyzed jointly. Triazolam 0.5 mg was found to be preferred and to be significantly better than both placebo and secobarbital 100 mg in the treatment of insomnia. Analysis of sleep questionnaire data showed triazolam to be superior to either placebo or secobarbital on the following parameters: how much the medication helped the patient sleep; onset of sleep; duration of sleep; and number of nocturnal awakenings. No differences were observed between treatments in any trial with regard to the patient's feeling of alertness the next morning. The side-effects reported for all treatments did not significantly interfere with the patients' ability to function.

Comparative Efficacy of Lormetazepam (Noctamid®) and Diazepam (Valium®) in 100 Out-Patients with Insomnia

1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Sastre y Hernández ◽  
H-D Hentschel ◽  
K Fichte
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Sleep Disorders ◽  
Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Comparative Efficacy ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Better Than

Lormetazepam (Noctamid®) at a dosage of 1 mg was compared with diazepam (Valium®) at a dosage of 5 mg in a 7-day double-blind study. The study involved fifty patients in the lormetazepam group and fifty patients in the diazepam group. All the patients were suffering from sleep disorders as a concomitant symptom of general diseases. Lormetazepam was significantly better than diazepam in the: Reduction of the time taken to fall asleep (p < 0.05) Prolongation of the duration of uninterrupted sleep (p < 0.05) Reduction of the frequency of awakening (p < 0.05) Lormetazepam displayed no hang-over effects or other side-effects and, in this respect too, was significantly superior to diazepam (p < 0.05).

Prevention of Rheumatic Fever

1973 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 501-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ham Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Antibiotic Therapy ◽  
Rheumatic Fever ◽  
Streptococcal Pharyngitis ◽  
Blind Study ◽  
Effective Drug ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Negative Results ◽  
Group A

Poststreptococcal sequelae can be markedly reduced by antibiotic therapy which eradicates the organism from the pharynx. In a double blind study, the effectiveness of clindamycin palmitate liquid was compared with that of ampicillin for eradicating group A beta hemolytic streptococci from patients with pharyngitis. Cultures four days posttherapy were negative in 95 (93.2%) of 102 clindamycin treated patients and in 92 (87.6%) of 105 in the ampicillin group. Seventy-six clindamycin treated and 79 ampicillin treated patients had 28-day cultures with negative results in 69 (90.8%) and 67 (84.8%), respectively. Possible side effects were both mild and infrequent, 3.8 per cent from ampicillin and 2.6 per cent from clindamycin. It was concluded that clindamycin palmitate is palatable, relatively free of side effects and is an effective drug for treatment of streptococcal pharyngitis. No poststreptococcal sequelae occurred.

A Comparative Trial of Minocin (Minocycline Hydrochloride) and Ampicillin in the Treatment of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Bronchitis

1975 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 304-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
G R F Burrow ◽  
A S Fox ◽  
R J E Daniel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Chronic Bronchitis ◽  
Therapeutic Efficacy ◽  
Comparative Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Acute Exacerbations ◽  
Minocycline Hydrochloride ◽  
Long Acting

One hundred and fifteen patients suffering from acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis took part in a double-blind, multicentre, clinical trial designed to compare the therapeutic efficacy and tolerability of ampicillin and minocycline hydrochloride, a new, long-acting, semi-synthetic tetracycline. Both antibiotics were equally successful in treatment, there being no statistically significant difference between the two in any of the parameters studied. Side-effects were few and far between. Only one patient out of the 57 who took minocycline, complained of dizziness.

scholarly journals A Comparison of xylometazoline (Otrivine) and phenylephrine/lignocaine mixture (Cophenylcaine) for the purposes of rigid nasendoscopy: a prospective, double-blind, randomised trial

2008 ◽  
Vol 123 (6) ◽  
pp. 626-630 ◽  
Author(s):  
N A McCluney ◽  
C Y Eng ◽  
M S W Lee ◽  
L G McClymont
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Statistical Methods ◽  
Nasal Spray ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Visual Analogue Score ◽  
Significant Extent ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Better Than

AbstractObjective:To evaluate if phenylephrine–lignocaine mixture (Cophenylcaine) nasal spray performs better than xylometazoline (Otrivine) spray for the purposes of out-patient rigid nasendoscopy preparation.Design:Prospective, double-blind, randomised trial comparing visual analogue scores for out-patients receiving either phenylephrine–lignocaine mixture or xylometazoline, prior to undergoing rigid nasendoscopy as part of their assessment.Subjects:Seventy-three patients requiring rigid nasendoscopy as part of their assessment were recruited to the study from Raigmore Hospital's out-patient clinic. These patients were randomised to receive a nasal spray comprising either phenylephrine–lignocaine mixture or xylometazoline, 10 minutes prior to rigid nasendoscopy. Double-blinding was adopted. After the procedure, the patient and the doctor independently completed separate visual analogue score-based questionnaires regarding the pain of the procedure and the ease of the examination, respectively.Results:Analysis of the data using standardised statistical methods demonstrated that the phenylephrine–lignocaine mixture did not perform better than xylometazoline, to any statistically significant extent.Conclusion:Phenylephrine–lignocaine mixture is considerably more expensive and has potentially more side effects than xylometazoline. These study findings suggest that it is difficult to justify the use of phenylephrine–lignocaine mixture over xylometazoline, for nasal preparation prior to rigid nasendoscopy.

Double-Blind Comparison of Alclofenac and Aspirin in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

1974 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 228-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
S S Bedi
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Therapeutic Efficacy ◽  
Morning Stiffness ◽  
Analgesic Efficacy ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Chronic Stage ◽  
American Rheumatism Association ◽  
Blind Comparison

In a double-blind short term cross-over study, designed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of alclofenac, 500 mg thrice daily against aspirin, 866 mg thrice daily, fifty patients in a chronic stage of classical or definite rheumatoid arthritis (according to American Rheumatism Association ( 1959) criteria) were selected. The criteria of assessment included pain, function and morning stiffness. The patients' and physician's overall preferences and opinion on tolerance were also recorded. Forty-eight patients completed the study successfully. The study showed that both drugs were significantly effective in relieving pain but there was no difference between the two preparations and neither drug made any improvement to function or morning stiffness. The patients' and physician's preferences and opinion on the therapeutic efficacy were almost equally divided between the two drugs. However, the instances of side-effects were a little higher ( 44%) with aspirin than with alclofenac ( 34%). It appears from this study that in chronic rheumatoid arthritis the analgesic activity of 1·5 g alclofenac is equivalent to 2·6 g (approx.) of aspirin.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document