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.

DOUBLE-BLIND COMPARISON OF IBUPROFEN AND PHENYLBUTAZONE IN THE SHORT-TERM TREATMENT OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

Rheumatology ◽  
1973 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. PAVELKA ◽  
A. SUSTA ◽  
O. VOJTÍŠEK ◽  
A. BREMOVÁ ◽  
D. KAŇKOVÁ ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Term Treatment ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Short Term Treatment ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Comparison

Double-Blind Comparison of Maternal Analgesia and Neonatal Neurobehaviour following Intravenous Butorphanol and Meperidine

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 224-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Hodgkinson ◽  
Robert W Huff ◽  
Robert H Hayashi ◽  
Farkhanda J Husain
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Severe Pain ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Analgesic Efficacy ◽  
Foetal Heart Rate ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Cervical Dilation ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Blind Comparison

Butorphanol (1 mg and 2 mg) and meperidine (40 mg and 80 mg), given intravenously, were evaluated for analgesic efficacy and safety in a double-blind randomized study employing 200 consenting pre-partum patients in moderate to severe pain during the late first stage of labour. Both drugs provided adequate relief of pain to the mothers. There was no significant difference in the rate of cervical dilation, the foetal heart rate, the Apgar score, pain relief or neonatal neurobehavioural scores between those receiving butorphanol and those receiving meperidine. Twenty-two mothers who received butorphanol and eleven who received meperidine nursed their infants with no adverse effects observed. Side-effects were generally infrequent in this study; however, more side-effects were reported by the patients and observed by the investigator in the meperidine-treated cases (13%) than in the cases treated with butorphanol (2%).

Thylin - follow-up

1964 ◽  
Vol 2 (20) ◽  
pp. 80-80
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Chronic Arthritis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Previous Therapy ◽  
Blind Comparison

Since we discussed nifenazone (Thylin - West Pharmaceuticals) last April (Drug & Therap. Bull. 2, 26) Hart and Boardman1 have reported a trial of the drug, the first published in Britain. They substituted nifenazone 750–2000 mg daily for phenylbutazone, oxyphenbutazone or salicylates in 26 patients with painful chronic arthritis, mostly rheumatoid. In 18 of these the symptoms became worse; 7 showed some benefit, but less than with the previous therapy, and in one the improvement was comparable with that obtained from phenylbutazone 300 mg daily. Various side effects e.g. dyspepsia, nausea, mouth ulcers, rash occurred in 8 of the 26 patients. In 10 further patients with rheumatoid arthritis a double-blind comparison was made between nifenazone 500 mg three times daily and placebo tablets. Two patients withdrew from the trial; among the other 8, symptoms improved in one, but 7 noted no change. Objective criteria showed no significant improvement. The results of larger trials of the drug, to be published next November, will be awaited with interest.

A Double-Blind Comparison of Flurbiprofen and Indomethacin Suppositories in the Treatment of Osteoarthrosis and Rheumatoid Disease

1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 495-500 ◽  
Author(s):  
M De Moor ◽  
R Ooghe
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Morning Stiffness ◽  
Daily Intake ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Double Blind Trial ◽  
Rheumatoid Disease ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Night Pain ◽  
Erythrocyte Sedimentation ◽  
Blind Comparison

Forty patients with osteoarthrosis or rheumatoid arthritis were entered in a 4-week double-blind trial to compare the efficacy, safety and tolerance of a flurbiprofen 100 mg suppository formulation with indomethacin 100 mg suppositories. There were twenty patients each on indomethacin and flurbiprofen. Statistically significant improvements were reported for both treatments during the study with respect to morning stiffness, night pain and the overall progress of the patients. Both treatments were equally effective with respect to the amount of improvement shown for the parameters. No improvement was noted on either treatment with respect to grip-strength, functional capacity or the daily intake of analgesic therapy, while a marginally significant decrease in the erythrocyte sedimentation rate was noted on indomethacin. Both treatments were well tolerated with only a few transient and mild side-effects being reported. On the basis of this trial, flurbiprofen and indomethacin suppositories have equal therapeutic effects in the treatment of night pain and morning stiffness.

Double-blind comparison of alclofenac and phenylbutazone in the short-term treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

1973 ◽  
Vol 1 (6) ◽  
pp. 342-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Pavelka ◽  
O. Vojtíek ◽  
A. Brémová ◽  
D. Kaková ◽  
D. Handlová
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Term Treatment ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Short Term Treatment ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Comparison

Efficacy and Safety of a Non-Acetylated Salicylate, Choline Magnesium Trisalicylate, in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

1983 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 343-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
K G Rothwell
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Morning Stiffness ◽  
Index Number ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Clinical Indicators ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Multicentre Trials ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Articular Index

The results of three double-blind, multicentre trials are reviewed to compare the efficacy of acetysalicylic acid (ASA) and a non-acetylated salicylate, choline magnesium trisalicylate (CMT), in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. In each trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive comparable doses of salicylate as either ASA or CMT. Mean values for clinical indicators of rheumatoid arthritis (number of painful joints, articular index, number of swollen joints, swelling index, duration of morning stiffness) showed similar or greater improvement among groups of patients receiving CMT, compared to those receiving ASA. In addition, the incidence of gastro-intestinal side-effects was lower among patients receiving CMT.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document