General Practitioners' Evaluation of Side-Effects and Efficacy of Oxamethacin as Compared with Indomethacin

1980 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Polderman ◽  
M Colon
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Drug Therapy ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Inflammatory Drug ◽  
Pathological Conditions ◽  
Maximum Duration ◽  
Double Blind Clinical Trial ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Sixteen general practitioners conducted a multicentre double-blind clinical trial to compare oxamethacin (100 mg t.i.d.) with indomethacin (50 mg t.i.d.) for a maximum duration of 2 weeks. Each drug was administered to 339 patients suffering from various pathological conditions requiring a non steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. When focusing on patients without associated drug therapy, 126/250 patients (50%) presented a good response on inflammation under oxamethacin and 98/236 patients (42%) a good response under indomethacin (p < 10−2); 141/250 patients (56%) presented a good response on pain under oxamethacin and 117/236 (50%) under indomethacin (p<5.10−2). Side effects and complaints were reported by 34/250 patients (14%) under oxamethacin and by 67/236 (28%) under indomethacin (p < 5.10−5). Some patients stopped treatment because of side-effects: 14/250 (6%) under oxamethacin and 32/236 (14%) under indomethacin (p < 2.10−3).

Potential complications of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug therapy

1989 ◽  
Vol 79 (12) ◽  
pp. 605-614
Author(s):  
GD Corrigan ◽  
L Pantig-Felix ◽  
IO Kanat
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Drug Therapy ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Mechanism Of Action ◽  
Drug Class ◽  
Inflammatory Drug ◽  
The Us ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Since indomethacin was first marketed, some 40 years ago, the class of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs has grown larger than any other drug class in history. At present, there are at least 25 such drugs being used in the US and abroad, both clinically and in research. Despite their widespread use, their implications to health care are just beginning to be understood. The authors review updated theories on the mechanism of action, side effects, and drug interactions of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug therapy. Proposed guidelines for monitoring their use are given. A more thorough understanding of the risks-to-benefits ratio is provided in an effort to achieve maximum patient satisfaction and safety.

scholarly journals Comparison the Efficacy of Intranasal Ketamine Versus Intravenous Ketorolac on Acute Non-Traumatic Headaches: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Houman Rafiee Sarvari ◽  
Hamidreza Baigrezaii ◽  
Mohammad Nazarianpirdosti ◽  
Amirhossein Meysami ◽  
Roya Safari-Faramani
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Analgesic Effects ◽  
Headache Severity ◽  
Selective Approach ◽  
Double Blind Clinical Trial ◽  
Group B ◽  
Short Time ◽  
Intravenous Ketorolac

Abstract Introduction: Non - traumatic headaches are one of the most common causes of referral to hospital emergency. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intranasal ketamine and intravenous ketorolac on acute non-traumatic headaches.Methods: This randomized and double-blind clinical trial in 2019 years. 140 people were randomly divided into intranasal ketamine (A) and intravenous ketorolac (B). Group (A) received ketamine intranasal (0.75 mg/kg, max 75mg), and group B received intravenous ketorolac (30 mg). Headache severity was measured on arrival, 30, 60, and 120 minutes after intervention with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The side effects were recorded an hour after the intervention.Result: The mean difference of pain intensity 30, 60, and 120 minutes after the intervention between the two groups were statistically significant (p<0.001). In the first 30 minutes, significant changes were observed in the VAS levels of the two groups. These changes were more and significant in the intranasal ketamine group (p <0.001). Side effects such as fatigue, dizziness, public discomfort, nausea, increased heart rate, and hypertension were significantly higher in the ketamine group (p <0.05).Conclusion: Intranasal ketamine and intravenous ketorolac both effectively reduced headaches. However, more analgesic effects of intranasal ketamine in a short time can be considered as a selective approach to reducing headaches.

scholarly journals Comparison the Efficacy of Intranasal Ketamine Versus Intravenous Ketorolac on Acute Non-traumatic Headaches: A Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Houman Rafiee Sarvari ◽  
Hamidreza Baigrezaii ◽  
Mohammad Nazarianpirdosti ◽  
Amirhossein Meysami ◽  
Roya Safari-Faramani
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Analgesic Effects ◽  
Headache Severity ◽  
Selective Approach ◽  
Double Blind Clinical Trial ◽  
Group B ◽  
Short Time ◽  
Intravenous Ketorolac

Abstract Introduction: Non - traumatic headaches are one of the most common causes of referral to hospital emergency. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intranasal ketamine and intravenous ketorolac on acute non-traumatic headaches.Methods: This randomized and double-blind clinical trial in 2019 years. 140 people were randomly divided into intranasal ketamine (A) and intravenous ketorolac (B). Group (A) received ketamine intranasal (0.75 mg/kg, max 75mg), and group B received intravenous ketorolac (30 mg). Headache severity was measured on arrival, 30, 60, and 120 minutes after intervention with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The side effects were recorded an hour after the intervention.Result: The mean difference of pain intensity 30, 60, and 120 minutes after the intervention between the two groups were statistically significant (p<0.001). In the first 30 minutes, significant changes were observed in the VAS levels of the two groups. These changes were more and significant in the intranasal ketamine group (p <0.001). Side effects such as fatigue, dizziness, public discomfort, nausea, increased heart rate, and hypertension were significantly higher in the ketamine group (p <0.05).Conclusion: Intranasal ketamine and intravenous ketorolac both effectively reduced headaches. However, more analgesic effects of intranasal ketamine in a short time can be considered as a selective approach to reducing headaches.Trial registration: IRCT20180108038276N3, Registered 29 September 2019.

A Long Term Double-Blind Clinical Trial of Ibuprofen and Indomethacin in Rheumatoid Arthritis

1975 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
G L Royer ◽  
T E Moxley ◽  
M S Hearron ◽  
A Miyara ◽  
B M Shenker
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Clinical Trial

Two-hundred and eighteen individuals with rheumatoid arthritis were randomly assigned to six months treatment with ibuprofen (900-1800 mg/day) or indomethacin (75-150 mg/day). The drugs were equally effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis while the incidence of indomethacin side-effects was 1·5 times greater than the incidence of ibuprofen side-effects.

scholarly journals Treatment of patients with Schistosomiasis mansoni: a double blind clinical trial comparing praziquantel with oxamniquine

1986 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 174-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luiz Caetano da Silva ◽  
José Murilo R. Zeitune ◽  
Lucia Maria F. Rosa-Eid ◽  
Dirce Mary C. Lima ◽  
Rita H. Antonelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Chemical Structures ◽  
Double Blind Clinical Trial ◽  
Negative Findings ◽  
Rectal Biopsies ◽  
Cure Rates

A double-blind clinical trial involving 120 patients with chronic schistosomiasis was carried out to compare the tolerability and efficacy of praziquantel and oxamniquine. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups. One was treated with praziquantel, 55 mg/kg of body weight CBWT), and the other one with oxamniquine, 15mg/kg bwt, administered in a single oral dose. The diagnosis and the parasitological follow-up was based on stool examinations by quantitative Kato-Katz method and on rectal biopsies. Side-effects — mainly dizziness, sleepness, abdominal distress, headache, nausea and diarrhea — were observed in 87% of the cases. Their incidence, intensity and duration were similar for both drugs but abdominal pain was significantly more frequent after praziquantel intake and severe dizziness was more commonly reported after oxamniquine. A significant increase of alanine-aminotransferase and y-glutamyltransferase was found with the latter drug and of total bilirubin with the former one. A total of 48 patients treated with praziquantel and 46 with oxamniquine completed with negative findings the required three post-treatment parasitological controls — three slides of each stool sample on the first, third and sixth month. The achieved cure rates were 79.2% and 84.8%, respectively, a difference without statistical significance. The non-cured cases showed a mean reduction in the number of eggs per gram of feces of 93.5% after praziquantel and of 84.1% after oxamniquine. This diference also was not significant. Five patients retreated with praziquantel were cured but only one out of three treated a second time with oxamniquine. These findings show that both drugs — despite their different chemical structures, pharmacological properties and mechanisms-of-action — induce similar side-effects as well as a comparable therapeutical efficacy, in agreement with the results reported from analogous investigations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document