A Double-Blind Crossover Study of Two Cyclobenzaprine Regimens in Primary Fibromyalgia Syndrome

1993 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Santandrea ◽  
F Montrone ◽  
P Sarzi-Puttini ◽  
L Boccassini ◽  
I Caruso
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Crossover Study ◽  
Fibromyalgia Syndrome ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Primary Fibromyalgia ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Irritable Bowel ◽  
Primary Fibromyalgia Syndrome ◽  
Blind Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind Crossover Study

In a double-blind crossover study, the efficacy and tolerability of oral cyclobenzaprine administered in two different regimens were compared in 40 patients affected by primary fibromyalgia syndrome. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Each group of 20 patients was treated for 15 days with either a single dose of 10 mg/day cyclobenzaprine at bedtime or 30 mg/day cyclobenzaprine in three equal doses daily. Following treatment there was a 15-day washout period before the groups were crossed over to the other treatment. Both regimens resulted in a significant decline in the number of tender points; significant improvements were also reported in the quality of sleep, anxiety, fatigue, irritable bowel syndrome and stiffness. There was no significant difference in efficacy between the two therapeutic regimens at any stage during the trial. The frequency of reported side-effects was significantly greater ( P < 0.001) when patients received 30 mg/day cyclobenzaprine (26 patients, 84%) than when they received 10 mg/day (10 patients, 27%). A dose of 10 mg cyclobenzaprine at bedtime significantly improved the symptomatology of patients affected by primary fibromyalgia syndrome. The higher dose did not further reduce these symptoms but did result in a higher incidence of side-effects.

Double-Blind Study of Dothiepin versus Placebo in the Treatment of Primary Fibromyalgia Syndrome

1987 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 154-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Caruso ◽  
P. C. Sarzi Puttini ◽  
L. Boccassini ◽  
S. Santandrea ◽  
M. Locati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Fibromyalgia Syndrome ◽  
Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Clinical Variables ◽  
Primary Fibromyalgia ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Primary Fibromyalgia Syndrome

A double-blind study comparing the efficacy and tolerability of dothiepin with that of placebo in the treatment of primary fibromyalgia syndrome was carried out. Dothiepin was shown to improve significantly the condition of patients with primary fibromyalgia syndrome and there was a significant difference between dothiepin and placebo in all the clinical variables measured. Only mild and transient side-effects were reported. Further controlled studies are required to define the effects of dothiepin on fibromyalgia.

Comparison of Diazepam and Flurazepam in the Treatment of Insomnia in General Practice

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 401-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian MacPhail ◽  
W Alasdair Ogilvie ◽  
C R Purvis
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Sleep Disturbance ◽  
Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind Crossover Study

In a double-blind crossover study in general practice, flurazepam was shown to be significantly better (p<0.001) than diazepam in treating sleep disturbance. Fewer patients reported side-effects on flurazepam.

Double-Blind Crossover Study of Nabumetone versus Naproxen in the Treatment of Osteoarthritis

1982 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 214-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
L A Verbruggen ◽  
E Cytryn ◽  
H Pintens
Keyword(s):  
Crossover Study ◽  
Morning Stiffness ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Blind Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind Crossover Study ◽  
Special Patient ◽  
Total Trial

Twenty-one patients entered a double-blind crossover study to compare nabumetone with naproxen. After a I-week run-in period using a coated acetylsalicylic acid preparation, ten patients received nabumetone (1 g at night) over a period of 2 weeks, followed by 2 weeks on naproxen (250 mg b.i.d), while eleven patients received the same treatments in the reverse order. Morning stiffness, overall pain and night pain showed no significant difference after either treatment. A wide range of objective measurements were made relating to the hips, knees, and cervical and lumbar spine. No statistically significant differences were observed in the relatively small number of patients involved. Both treatments, however, appeared to produce a similar improvement in the patients. The physician's assessment showed that improvement occurred in a majority of the patients over the total trial period. Both drugs were considered to be equally effective and were both well tolerated. There was no special patient preference for either the first or second treatment. A total of eight patients reported side-effects, three during naproxen alone, three during both treatments, and two during the run-in period. In terms of tolerance, fifteen patients had no drug preference, six preferred nabumetone, none preferred naproxen. No evidence was found of changes in renal, hepatic or haematopoietic function with the two drugs tested.

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Neem Mouthwash on Plaque and Gingivitis: A Double-blind Crossover Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 567-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
RS Dhanya ◽  
VJ Adarsh ◽  
Md Jalaluddin ◽  
UB Rajasekaran ◽  
CB Sudeep
Keyword(s):  
Crossover Study ◽  
Comparative Evaluation ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Slight Reduction ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Group I ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Blind Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind Crossover Study

ABSTRACT Aim The present study aimed at evaluating the impact of neemcontaining mouthwash on plaque and gingivitis. Materials and methods This randomized, double-blinded, crossover clinical trial included 40 participants aged 18 to 35 years with washout period of 1 week between the crossover phases. A total of 20 participants, each randomly allocated into groups I and II, wherein in the first phase, group I was provided with 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate and group II with 2% neem mouthwash. After the scores were recorded, 1-week time period was given to the participants to carry over the effects of the mouthwashes and then the second phase of the test was performed. The participants were instructed to use the other mouthwash through the second test phase. Results There was a slight reduction of plaque level in the first phase as well as in the second phase. When comparison was made between the groups, no statistically significant difference was seen. Both the groups showed reduction in the gingival index (GI) scores in the first phase, and there was a statistically significant difference in both groups at baseline and after intervention (0.005 and 0.01 respectively). In the second phase, GI scores were reduced in both groups, but there was a statistically significant difference between the groups only at baseline scores (0.01). Conclusion In the present study, it has been concluded that neem mouthwash can be used as an alternative to chlorhexidine mouthwash based on the reduced scores in both the groups. Clinical significance Using neem mouthwash in maintaining oral hygiene might have a better impact in prevention as well as pervasiveness of oral diseases as it is cost-effective and easily available. How to cite this article Jalaluddin M, Rajasekaran UB, Paul S, Dhanya RS, Sudeep CB, Adarsh VJ. Comparative Evaluation of Neem Mouthwash on Plaque and Gingivitis: A Double-blind Crossover Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(7):567-571.

scholarly journals Comparison of Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia with Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia Using Pethidine or Fentanyl

1997 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 126-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. D. Ngan Kee ◽  
K. K. Lam ◽  
P. P. Chen ◽  
T. Gin
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Caesarean Section ◽  
Epidural Analgesia ◽  
Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Intravenous Analgesia ◽  
Fentanyl Consumption ◽  
Blind Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind Crossover Study

We compared patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) using pethidine or fentanyl in a randomized, double-blind crossover study of 80 patients after caesarean section. Patients received pethidine by PCEA or PCIA, or fentanyl by PCEA or PCIA, with a crossover of the route of administration at 12h. For pethidine, pain scores were lower with PCEA vs PCIA from 4 to 16 h (P<0.05). Pethidine consumption was lower with PCEA vs PCIA from 12 to 24 h (P=0.0005). Patients preferred PCEA to PCIA (P=0.015). For fentanyl, pain scores were lower with PCEA vs PCIA at 12 h (P=0.045). Fentanyl consumption was lower with PCEA vs PCIA from 0 to 12 h (P=0.0007). Patients had similar preference for PCEA and PCIA. Pain scores and side-effects were similar between drugs. Plasma pethidine was similar between groups. Plasma fentanyl was higher with PCIA vs PCEA at 12 h (P=0.002). PCEA has advantages over PCIA and pethidine may be the preferred drug.

An Analgesic Comparison of Floctafenine (Idarac) and Dihydrocodeine in Post-Operative Pain

1975 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 172-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Lipton ◽  
M Conway ◽  
F Ali Akbar
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Crossover Study ◽  
Analgesic Drug ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Post Operative Pain ◽  
Blind Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind Crossover Study

A double-blind crossover study comparing floctafenine 200 mg, a new analgesic drug, and dihydrocodeine 60 mg, was performed on 72 patients suffering from post-operative pain. Degree of pain relief by floctafenine was similar to that of dihydrocodeine but the relief afforded by the former was of longer duration. Side-effects associated with dihydrocodeine were statistically higher than those associated with floctafenine. Floctafenine was demonstrated to be an effective analgesic with an insignificant incidence of untoward side-effects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document