Anxiolytic Efficacy of Alprazolam Compared to Diazepam and Placebo

1980 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry M Maletzky

The anxiolytic effects of alpraxolam (0.5–3.0 mg), diazepam (5–60 mg) and placebo were evaluated in eighty-six out-patients suffering from moderate to severe psychoneurotic anxiety in this 28-day, double-blind study. Efficacy was evaluated using five rating instruments, three rated by the physician (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, Physician's Global Impressions and Target Symptoms) and two by the patients (Self-Rating Symptom Scale and Patient's Global Impressions). Alprazolam was more effective than placebo on all five measures of efficacy and, on several parameters, more effective than diazepam as well. The incidence of side-effects was lowest in the alprazolam group and decreased steadily over the course of the study, whereas the incidence in the diazepam and placebo groups remained relatively unchanged.

1988 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 218-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.N. Singh ◽  
N.P.V. Nair ◽  
B. Suranyi-Cadotte ◽  
G. Schwartz ◽  
E. Lizondo

In a six week, double-blind, parallel study of alprazolam and amitriptyline hydrochloride in 130 outpatients suffering from moderate to severe nonpsychotic depression, alprazolam was as effective as amitriptyline hydrochloride in relieving depressive symptoms and significantly more effective in relieving symptoms of anxiety and somatization. Alprazolam showed an earlier onset of activity in most measurements of efficacy and produced fewer side effects than amitriptyline hydrochloride. Anticholinergic side effects were reported more frequently by patients taking amitriptyline hydrochloride, while drowsiness was reported more frequently by patients taking alprazolam. At the end of the study, the average daily doses were 2.4 mg alprazolam and 135 mg amitriptyline hydrochloride. The Hamilton Psychiatric Rating Scale for Depression, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, Physician's Global Impressions, Patients’ Global Impressions, Hopkins Self-Rating Symptom Scale, and Symptom and Side Effects Checklist were evaluated at the end of weeks 1, 2, 3 and 6 to determine and compare the efficacy and safety of the two study drugs.


1976 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis F Fabre ◽  
Robert T Harris ◽  
Derek F Stubbs

The safety and efficacy of ketazolam (15 mg capsules) was compared to placebo in seventy-nine out-patients suffering from psychoneurotic anxiety, moderate or worse in severity. A flexible dosage range of 15-75 mg was used in this double-blind study lasting twenty-eight days. The average optimum therapeutic dose of ketazolam was 46.9 mg administered as a once-a-day dose at bedtime. Ketazolam was found to be significantly better than placebo in alleviating anxiety and its concomitant symptomatology as measured by the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, three Physician's Global Impressions, two Patient's Global Impressions, and three Target Symptoms. Fifteen patients dropped from the placebo group before completion of the study, and two withdrew from the ketazolam group. The patients receiving ketazolam experienced a greater reduction in symptomatology throughout the study when compared to the placebo group. Side-effects experienced by the ketazolam patients were less than, or equal to, the placebo patients. No deleterious side-effects occurred. No differences between the two groups were found for vital signs, EKG's, laboratory tests, or physical examinations.


1974 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 210-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Lambourn ◽  
J A Rees

Forty-one patients completed a four-week double-blind study comparing dothiepin and amitriptyline. The anti-depressant effect of the two drugs was measured by the Hamilton depression rating scale and a five-point global scale. Side-effects were recorded as mild, moderate or severe. Analysis of the results failed to demonstrate a statistically significant difference between the anti-depressant effect of the two drugs, but dothiepin was the favoured therapy in all assessments. Both drugs produced a significant improvement (p < 0·01) after only one week's therapy. The incidence and severity of side-effects were much less with dothiepin. An unexpected difference in the Hamilton scores at the end of the fourth week is to be investigated further.


2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Kamal Sonya ◽  
Davies C. V.

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Opioids are first introduced as additives to spinal anaesthesia in 1979, with intrathecal morphine as forerunner. Neuraxial opioids when added to local anaesthetics prolong the duration of sensory block, improve quality of block and no unwanted sympathetic blockade leading to hypotension. This prospective randomized double blind study was undertaken to evaluate the duration of analgesia, sensory and motor blocking properties and side effects of two opioids – Fentanyl and Buprenorphine, when used as adjuvant to spinal Bupivacaine in caesarean section.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Sixty patients between the age group 18-35 years belonging to ASA I and II posted for elective LSCS were randomly divided into two groups. Each group consisting of 30 patients , received either 1.8 ml 0.5% Bupivacaine with 25 mcg Fentanyl (group F) or 1.8 ml 0.5% Bupivacaine with 75 mcg buprenorphine (Group B). The onset, maximum level and duration of sensory and motor blockade and hemodynamic parameters were monitored.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Maximum height of sensory block was achieved faster in fentanyl group (i.e. 4.09±1.12 minutes compared to 4.56±1.21 minutes in buprenorphine group). Duration of analgesia was significantly prolonged in buprenorphine group. It was 317±54 minutes and 214±35 minutes respectively for buprenorphine and fentanyl groups.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> The study thus concluded that although fentanyl produce faster sensory block, duration of analgesia is longer with buprenorphine, and both the drugs do not cause significant side effects.</p>


2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 122-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harald Breivik ◽  
Tone Marte Ljosaa ◽  
Kristian Stengaard-Pedersen ◽  
Jan Persson ◽  
Hannu Aro ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectivePatients with osteoarthritis (OA) pain often have insufficient pain relief from non-opioid analgesics. The aim of this trial was to study efficacy and tolerability of a low dose 7-day buprenorphine transdermal delivery system, added to a NSAID or coxib regimen, in opioid-naïve patients with moderate to severe OA pain.MethodsA 6 months randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study at 19 centres in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, in which OA patients (>40 years) with at least moderate radiographic OA changes and at least moderate pain in a hip and/or knee while on a NSAID or a coxib were randomised to a 7-day buprenorphine patch (n = 100) or an identical placebo patch (n = 99). The initial patch delivered buprenorphine 5 μg/h. This was titrated to 10 or 20 μg/h, as needed. Rescue analgesic was paracetamol 0.5–4 g daily. Statistical analysis of outcome data was mainly with a general linear model, with treatment as factor, the primary joint of osteoarthritis, baseline scores, and season as covariates.ResultsMost patients had OA-radiographic grade II (moderate) or grade III (severe), only 8 in each group had very severe OA (grade IV). The median buprenorphine dose was 10 μg/h. 31 buprenorphine-treated patients and 2 placebo-treated patients withdrew because of side effects. Lack of effect caused 12 placebo-treated and 7 buprenorphine-treated patients to withdraw. The differences in effects between treatments: Daytime pain on movement, recorded every evening on a 0–10 numeric rating scale decreased significantly more (P = 0.029) in the buprenorphine group. Patients’ Global Impression of Change at the end of the double blind period was significantly improved in the buprenorphine group (P = 0.017). The chosen primary effect outcome measure, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) OA Index for Pain (P = 0.061), and secondary outcome measures, the WOMAC OA score for functional abilities (P = 0.055), and the WOMAC total score (P = 0.059) indicated more effects from buprenorphine than placebo, but these differences were not statistically significant. In a post-hoc, subgroup analysis with the 16 patients with radiographic grad IV (very severe) excluded, WOMAC OA Index for Pain was significantly (P = 0.039) reduced by buprenorphine, compared with placebo. WOMAC OA score for stiffness and the amount of rescue medication taken did not differ. Sleep disturbance, quality of sleep, and quality of life improved in both groups. Side effects: Typical opioid side effects caused withdrawal at a median of 11 days before completing the 168 days double blind trial in 1/3 of the buprenorphine group. Mostly mild local skin reactions occurred equally often (1/3) in both groups.ConclusionsAlthough the 24 hours WOMAC OsteoArthritis Index of pain was not statistically significantly superior to placebo, day-time movement-related pain and patients’ global impression of improvement at the end of the 6-months double blind treatment period were significantly better in patients treated with buprenorphine compared with placebo. Opioid side effects caused 1/3 of the buprenorphine-patients to withdraw before the end of the 6-months double blind study period.ImplicationsA low dose 7-days buprenorphine patch at 5–20 μg/h is a possible means of pain relief in about 2/3 of elderly osteoarthritis patients, in whom pain is opioid-sensitive, surgery is not possible, NSAIDs and coxibs are not recommended, and paracetamol in tolerable doses is not effective enough. Vigilant focus on and management of opioid side effects are essential.


1984 ◽  
Vol 145 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Silverstone ◽  
S. Levine ◽  
H. L. Freeman ◽  
A. Dubini

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).


Author(s):  
PADMA PRIYA CHANDRAN ◽  
SINDHU S. ◽  
NAVANEETHAKRISHNAN S. ◽  
SASIKUMAR S. ◽  
KARTHIK S.

Objective: Anxiety disorders are the most common group of psychiatric illnesses in children. This study is to observe the effectiveness of Paroxetine in anxiety disorder among teenagers in South India population using Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) and to screen the possible risk for paroxetine in anxiety disorder among teenagers. Methods: This study is a prospective observational study that was conducted for a period of 6 mo. Of 84 teenage patients with anxiety disorder assessed using Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) were followed-up in an outpatient psychiatric ward. Study population includes both sexes, age group between 13 to 19 y, Teenage patient receiving paroxetine for anxiety disorder were included and patients unwilling to give written informed consent or assent form were excluded. Results: Out of 84 patients the prevalence of symptoms before the drug treatment, 65 patients were falling in very severe category, which was assessed by HAM-A scale. Then reassessed with drug Paroxetine at week 4 and week 8. There was a drastic reduction in the prevalence of symptoms in week 8 than compared to week 4. A significant reduction in body weight was also observed during the study period. Among various side effects, nausea was the prominent risk found during the study. Conclusion: The present study demonstrated that paroxetine is effective and well-tolerated for the treatment of various types of anxiety disorder in teenagers with few side effects.


1985 ◽  
Vol 147 (3) ◽  
pp. 306-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. J. Naylor ◽  
B. Martin

SummaryIndalpine 150 mg per day and mianserin 60 mg per day were compared in a double-blind study of 65 depressed out-patients: 52 patients completed the 4-week trial. At the end of four weeks there was no significant difference in antidepressant effect between the two drugs; but in the first two weeks, improvement in the mianserin-treated group was significantly greater than that in the indalpine group. The mianserin-treated group reported more side-effects of sedation (eg. drowsiness, clumsiness, heaviness of limbs etc.) and one patient on indalpine developed a mild leucopenia.


1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Sastre y Hernández ◽  
H-D Hentschel ◽  
K Fichte

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).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document