A Double-Blind Study of Dothiepin Hydrochloride (Prothiaden) and Amitriptyline in Out-Patients with Masked Depression

1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
L E Dahl ◽  
S J Dencker ◽  
L Lundin

A group of forty patients who presented to their general practitioner with depression or somatic complaints, which were considered to be due to depression, were included in a double-blind trial of dothiepin and amitriptyline. Patient improvement as judged by the Hamilton Rating Scale (HRS) and the Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS) indicated that both groups significantly improved over the 6 week period. Only in one comparison, CPRS after 1 week, was there any statistical difference between the groups and in this case dothiepin produced a better response than amitriptyline (p < 0.05). Statistical analysis of side-effects indicated that the frequency and severity of certain individual side-effects, hypotension, tiredness/sleepiness and dry mouth were significantly less with dothiepin than with amitriptyline at Week 1 (p < 0.05). The overall incidence and severity of side-effects was also less with dothiepin at all assessments during the trial.

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.


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.


1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
I Agorastos ◽  
N P Zissis ◽  
I Kaprinis ◽  
G Goulis

The anti-emetic effects of domperidone were evaluated under double-blind conditions in twenty-four patients with acute vomiting randomly assigned to treatment either with 10 mg i.m. domperidone (six females, five males) or with placebo (seven females, six males). The therapeutic results were better with domperidone and the differences from placebo were statistically significant (p < 0.02). In a second randomized, crossover, double-blind trial, domperidone (10 mg t.i.d.) evaluated according to a nine-symptom rating scale, in eighteen dyspeptic patients, proved significantly more effective than placebo. The duration of treatment was 6 weeks and the drugs were crossed-over after 3 weeks. The difference between the two groups was most marked during the second phase of the trial. No side-effects were reported.


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.


1978 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 388-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Cecchini ◽  
P Petri ◽  
R Ardito ◽  
S R Bareggi ◽  
A Torriti

On the grounds of pharmacological properties and preliminary clinical trials the efficacy of the new antidepressant caroxazone was compared to amitriptyline in the management of depression. Forty patients mostly suffering from a neurotic or anxious-neurotic depression were admitted to a double-blind trial. All patients completed the study. The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression was used for the clinical assessment at the beginning, during and at the end of treatment. The trial lasted three weeks. A significant improvement was seen for both drugs after seven days on most symptom scores and on total symptom score. No significant differences were found either at seven days or at the end of treatment between the two drugs. There were no significant differences in the incidence and severity of side-effects. In conclusion, caroxazone appears as an effective and well tolerated drug in the treatment of depression.


1994 ◽  
Vol 164 (6) ◽  
pp. 802-805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl Rickels ◽  
Edward Schweizer ◽  
Cathryn Clary ◽  
Ira Fox ◽  
Charles Weise

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.


1995 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 299-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Clifford Kirkby ◽  
Warren Grant Beckett ◽  
Ruth Mima Matters ◽  
T. E. King

The effect of the induction agents propofol and methohexitone on seizure duration and clinical outcome was assessed in a prospective, randomised, double blind study in 32 depressed patients receiving electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Assessments comprised Hamilton rating scales pre-ECT, weekly during the course, and at one month follow-up. Patients showed a significant improvement in depression as measured by the Hamilton rating scale across the course of the ECT treatment. This improvement was not significantly different in the propofol and methohexitone groups. Nor was the amount of improvement related to either the total duration of seizure experienced by the patient during the ECT series or the use of tricyclic antidepressants by some patients.


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.


1975 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 269-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. H. Buchanan ◽  
R. V. Parton ◽  
J. W. Warren ◽  
E. P. Baker

A double blind study in 28 patients with chronic schizophrenia was carried out comparing L-dopa (up to 1250 mgm daily) with placebo (both groups continuing to receive regular neuroleptic medication) over a six week period. Assessments by the psychiatrists and psychologist using Rockland and Pollin Rating Scale showed differential improvement of insignificant proportions but the nurse's ratings showed clearly significant improvement in the subject group.


1994 ◽  
Vol 165 (4) ◽  
pp. 506-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher F. Fear ◽  
Carl S. Littlejohns ◽  
Eryl Rouse ◽  
Paul McQuail

BackgroundThe induction agent propofol is known to reduce electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) seizure duration. It is assumed that outcome from depression is adversely affected by this agent. This study compares propofol and methohexitone as induction agents for ECT.MethodIn a prospective, randomised, double-blind study 20 subjects with major depressive disorder (DSM-III-R criteria) received propofol or methohexitone anaesthesia. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and Beck Depression Inventory were used to assess depression before therapy, at every third treatment, and at the end of therapy. Seizure duration was measured using the cuff technique.ResultsMean seizure durations (P < 0.01) and mean total seizure duration (P < 0.01) were shorter in the propofol group. There was no difference in outcome.ConclusionsUse of propofol may not adversely affect outcome from depression and it is not necessarily contraindicated as an induction agent for ECT. Our results should be interpreted cautiously, and larger studies are needed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document