A Comparative Trial of Orphenadrine and Tofenacin in the Control of Depression and Extrapyramidal Side-Effects Associated with Fluphenazine Decanoate Therapy

1976 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 435-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Capstick ◽  
Helena Pudney
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Comparative Trial ◽  
Major Metabolite ◽  
Extrapyramidal Side Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Fluphenazine Decanoate ◽  
Adequate Control ◽  
Significant Difference

A trial involving patients receiving fluphenazine decanoate was designed to compare the effects of orphenadrine hydrochloride (Disipal) and its major metabolite, tofenacin hydrochloride (Elamol) on the Parkinsonian side-effects and depression occurring during fluphenazine decanoate therapy. The trial was a double-blind one, with crossover. It was found that both drugs exerted an adequate control on the Parkinsonian side-effects, but there was no significant difference between their effects. Ophenadrine, however, was shown to be significantly superior (p > 0·05) in the control of the depressive side-effects.

Dibenzepin and Amitriptyline in the Treatment of Depression

1971 ◽  
Vol 118 (546) ◽  
pp. 523-524 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Y. Ekdawi
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Antidepressant Drug ◽  
Comparative Trial ◽  
Tricyclic Antidepressant ◽  
Pharmacological Properties ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Depressed Patients ◽  
Treatment Of Depression ◽  
Significant Difference

Dibenzepin hydrochloride is a new tricyclic antidepressant drug with pharmacological properties midway between those of imipramine and amitriptyline. In a double-blind comparative trial, J. M. Fielding (Med. J. Australia, 1969, 1, 614) found no significant difference in the speed of the effect of the two drugs in depressed patients. He reported that side-effects rated subjectively by patients were maximal before starting on the drugs and tended to decrease with time. The following trial was accordingly staged.

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.

Depressive and Extrapyramidal Symptoms and Clinical Effects: A Trial of Fluphenazine versus Flupenthixol in Maintenance of Schizophrenic Out-patients

1979 ◽  
Vol 135 (6) ◽  
pp. 515-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Knights ◽  
M. S. Okasha ◽  
Mohamed Ali Salih ◽  
S. R. Hirsch
Keyword(s):  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Clinical Data ◽  
Clinical Effects ◽  
Extrapyramidal Side Effects ◽  
Double Blind Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Fluphenazine Decanoate ◽  
Flupenthixol Decanoate

SummaryFifty-seven patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia were started on either fluphenazine decanoate or flupenthixol decanoate injections in a double-blind trial just prior to discharge into the community. During the six month follow-up 30 per cent dropped out of the treatment. Of those observed for six months, 7 per cent relapsed, 54 per cent experienced depressive symptoms and 88 per cent extrapyramidal side-effects. Analysis of both clinical data and the ratings failed to discriminate between the two drugs.

scholarly journals Topical Diltiazem Versus Topical Glyceryl Trinitrate In The Management Of Chronic Anal Fissure

JMS SKIMS ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-58
Author(s):  
Shams Ul Bari ◽  
Ajaz Ahmad Malik ◽  
Khurshid Alam Wani ◽  
Ajaz A Rather
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Anal Fissure ◽  
Chronic Anal Fissure ◽  
P Value ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Surgical Methods ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Topical Glyceryl Trinitrate ◽  
One Year

Background: Chemical sphincterotomy is a novel way for treating patients of chronic anal fissure which avoids the risk of fecal incontinence associated with traditional surgical methods. Aims and objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the results of topical Diltiazem with topical Glyceril trinitrate in the management of chronic anal fissure. Methods: 71 patients in the age group of 15 - 61 years with chronic anal fissure were included in this prospective, randomized, double-blind trial over a period of two years with further follow up for one year. The patients were randomly allocated to either Diltiazem gel 2% (37 patients) or Glyceril trinitrate ointment 0.2% (34 patients) and were asked to use the treatment twice daily for 8 weeks. Each patient was reviewed every two weeks. Symptoms, healing, side effects and recurrence were compared using SPSS version 10 employing X2 test. A p-value below 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Patients who received topical diltiazem (DTZ) showed statistically significant difference than those who were prescribed topical glyceril trinitrate in terms of symptoms, wound healing, side effects ( headaches) and recurrence (p=0.03 and 0.003 respectively). Healing occurred in 34 of 37 (92%) patients treated with Diltiazem after 6 weeks and 27 of 34 (80%) patients treated with Glyceril trinitrate after 8 weeks, which shows a significant difference in favour of Diltiazem (P < 0.001). The rest of the patients did not heal and underwent sphincterotomy (SILS). Headache occurred in all of the patients treated with Glyceril trinitrate but none of the patients treated with Diltiazem. Conclusion: Diltiazem gel was found to be better than Glyceril trinitrate ointment due to significantly higher healing rate and fewer side-effects. JMS 2014;17(2):55-58

scholarly journals Perbandingan Efektivitas Anestesi Spinal dengan Bupivacain 12,5 Mg dan Bupivacain 5 Mg yang ditambah Fentanyl 50 Mcg pada Seksio Sesarea

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-7
Author(s):  
Fritzky Indradata ◽  
Heri Dwi Purnomo ◽  
Muh. Husni Thamrin ◽  
Sugeng Budi Santoso ◽  
Ardana Tri Arianto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Cesarean Section ◽  
Spinal Anesthesia ◽  
Randomized Control Trial ◽  
Hyperbaric Bupivacaine ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Duration Of Action ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Randomized Control

Latar Belakang: Anestesi spinal mempunyai efek samping berupa hipotensi dan mual muntah. Tujuan: penelitian ini adalah membandingkan efek anestesi spinal bupivacain dosis normal 12,5 mg dan bupivacain dosis rendah 5 mg dengan fentanyl 50 mg pada seksio sesarea terhadap perubahan hemodinamik, ketinggian blok, onset, durasi dan efek samping. Subjek dan Metode: Penelitian double blind randomized control trial pada 36 pasien yang memenuhi kriteria. Pasien dibagi menjadi dua kelompok, yang masing-masing terdiri 18 pasien, kelompok 1 dilakukan anestesi spinal dengan bupivacain hiperbarik 5 mg ditambah adjuvan fentanyl 50 mcg, sedangkan kelompok 2 diberikan bupivacain hiperbarik 12,5 mg. Penilaian meliputi saat mula kerja blokade sensorik, mula kerja blokade motorik, durasi, tekanan darah, laju nadi, dan saturasi oksigen, lama kerja dan efek samping. Data hasil penelitian diuji secara statistik dengan uji chi-square. Hasil: Terdapat perbedaan signifikan pada onset dan durasi blokade sensorik dan motorik, bupivacain 12,5 mg lebih baik dibandingkan bupivacain 5 mg + fentanyl 50 mcg (p<0.05). Tidak ada perbedaan signifikan pada perubahan tanda vital dan efek samping (p>0.05). Simpulan: Bupivacain 12,5 mg menghasilkan onset lebih cepat dan durasi lebih lama dibandingkan bupivacain 5 mg + fentanil 50 mcg pada anestesi spinal untuk seksio sesarea   Comparison of The Effectiveness Spinal Anesthesia with Bupivacaine 12,5 Mg and Bupivacaine 5 Mg added Fentanyl 50 Mcg in Caesarean Section Abstract Background: Spinal anesthesia has side effects such as hypotension and nausea and vomiting. Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of spinal anesthesia with normal doses of 12,5 mg of bupivacaine and 5 mg of low-dose bupivacaine with fentanyl 50 mg in the cesarean section on hemodynamic changes, block height, onset, duration, and side effects. Subjects and Methods: Double-blind randomized control trial in 36 patients who met the criteria. Patients were divided into two groups, each consisting of 18 patients, group 1 underwent spinal anesthesia with 5 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine plus 50 mcg of fentanyl adjuvant, while group 2 was given 12,5 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine. Assessments include the initiation of sensory block action, onset of motor block action, duration, blood pressure, pulse rate, and oxygen saturation, duration of action, and side effects. The research data were statistically tested with the chi-square test. Results: There were significant differences in the onset and duration of sensory and motor blockade, bupivacaine 12,5 mg was better than bupivacaine 5 mg + fentanyl 50 mcg (p <0.05). There was no significant difference in changes in vital signs and side effects (p> 0.05). Conclusion: Bupivacaine 12,5 mg resulted in a faster onset and longer duration than bupivacaine 5 mg + fentanyl 50 mcg in spinal anesthesia for cesarean section.

A Comparative Trial of Opipramol and Chlordiazepoxide in the Treatment of Anxiety

1973 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 145-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Jepson ◽  
G Beaumont
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Comparative Trial ◽  
Anxiety Score ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Somatic Anxiety ◽  
Daily Dose ◽  
The Difference

A daily dose of 200 mg of opipramol (Insidon, Geigy) and 30 mg of chlordiazepoxide (Librium, Roche) were compared in a clinical trial in general practice. The trial was double blind and a stratified randomisation technique was employed. Twenty four patients received opipramol and twenty six chlordiazepoxide for four weeks. A total anxiety score and separate ‘psychic’ anxiety and ‘somatic’ anxiety scores were recorded, using a rating scale initially and after two and four weeks treatment. No overall difference in efficacy was found between the two drugs—opipramol producing a 76% improvement and chlordiazepoxide 64% by the end of the study. There was no difference in the relief of psychic anxiety. Although opipramol appeared to give more relief of somatic anxiety, the difference was not statistically significant. Again although opipramol relieved more individual symptoms than chlordiazepoxide, none of the differences were significant. 70% of patients on opipramol and 74% of those on chlordiazepoxide were classified ‘better’ globally by both doctor and patient by the end of the trial. The total number of side effects recorded was similar on both drugs although drowsiness occurred twice as frequently on chlordiazepoxide as it did on opipramol.

Zetidoline, A New Antipsychotic

1984 ◽  
Vol 145 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Silverstone ◽  
S. Levine ◽  
H. L. Freeman ◽  
A. Dubini
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Dopamine Receptor ◽  
Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Extrapyramidal Side Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Receptor Blocking ◽  
Selective Dopamine

SummaryZetidoline (ZTD), a compound chemically unrelated to any available antipsychotic, with selective dopamine receptor-blocking properties, was compared with haloperidol (HLP) in a double-blind study on 56 in-patients who had either first episodes or acute relapses of schizophrenia. ZTD was found to be safe, as effective as HLP, and to produce significantly fewer extrapyramidal side-effects (EPS).

Prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis: a double-blind multicenter randomized crossover study comparing ondansetron and ondansetron plus dexamethasone.

1991 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 675-678 ◽  
Author(s):  
F Roila ◽  
M Tonato ◽  
F Cognetti ◽  
E Cortesi ◽  
G Favalli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Crossover Study ◽  
Receptor Antagonist ◽  
Treatment Preference ◽  
Complete Protection ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Antiemetic Activity ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Randomized Crossover Study

Ondansetron (OND) is a new 5-HT3 receptor antagonist that give complete protection from emesis/nausea in approximately 50% of cisplatin (CDDP)-treated patients. To evaluate if dexamethasone (DEX) added to OND increases antiemetic efficacy, we carried out a double-blind randomized crossover study to compare the antiemetic activity of OND with OND plus DEX. One hundred two chemotherapy-naive patients (44 women and 58 men) scheduled to receive CDDP chemotherapy at doses greater than or equal to 50 mg/m2 entered the study. Eighty-nine patients completed both cycles with the following results: complete protection from emesis/nausea was obtained in 57/59 patients (64.0%/66.3%) with OND and in 81/79 (91.0%/88.8%) with OND plus DEX (P = .0005/P = .0021). At the end of the study, 53% of the patients expressed a treatment preference, and of these, 74% chose OND plus DEX compared with 26% who preferred OND alone, a statistically significant difference (P less than .003). Side effects were very mild and not significantly different between the two treatments. We conclude that OND plus DEX is more efficacious than OND in protecting patients from CDDP-induced emesis and nausea.

A Controlled Comparative Trial of a New Antidepressant, Ciclazindol

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sidney Levine
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Comparative Trial ◽  
Poor Response ◽  
Endogenous Depression ◽  
Depressive Illness ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Severity Of Depression ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Rate Of Response

The author describes a controlled, double-blind, comparative trial of a new tetracyclic compound, ciclazindol (WY 23409), against amitriptyline in the treatment of thirty-five patients admitted to hospital with depressive illness. Each patient was randomly allocated to three weeks treatment with either 50 mg b.d. ciclazindol or 50 mg b.d. amitriptyline. In the event of a poor response the dose level was raised to 75 mg b.d. Separation of cases of endogenous depression and severity of depression were assessed by the Levine-Pilowsky Depression Questionnaire, a self-rating technique. Severity of depression was also assessed using the Hamilton Rating Scale. No significant difference was noted between the drugs in either the degree or the rate of response nor when the endogenous cases alone were studied. The interesting observation was made that only one-third of ciclazindol patients gained weight compared to almost three-quarters of the amitriptyline group and the mean weight gain of the latter was over double that of the ciclazindol group. The author concludes that ciclazindol offers promise and merits further study using higher dosage levels once its full safety trials have been completed.

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%).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document