Does Propranolol have an Antipsychotic Effect?

1986 ◽  
Vol 148 (6) ◽  
pp. 701-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul Manchanda ◽  
Steven R. Hirsch
Keyword(s):  
Placebo Group ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Double Blind Trial ◽  
Clinical Change ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Initial Improvement ◽  
Pre Treatment ◽  
Group D ◽  
Pharmacological Basis

Thirty-six acute schizophrenics were randomly assigned to dextro (d)-propranolol or placebo in a double blind trial lasting four weeks. All patients had a fixed dose of haloperidol during the first week, which resulted in an initial improvement in both groups. Thereafter, a deterioration towards base-line was seen. Six patients on placebo, but none on propranolol were treatment failures at the end of three weeks (P < 0.001). Comparison of change in scores from week 2 to 4 showed significantly greater deterioration in the placebo group; d-propranolol thus had a better effect than placebo in sustaining the initial improvement with haloperidol. The overall magnitude of clinical change from pre-treatment scores is small, the majority of the patients showing little or no overall improvement. It is concluded that d-propranolol has a detectable therapeutic effect, which by inference must have a novel pharmacological basis, but this is not as potent as standard neuroleptics.

scholarly journals Effects of Dexmedetomidine on Intraoperative Hemodynamic Responses in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomised Double Blind Trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dhanashree Dongare ◽  
Smita Gharde
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Loading Dose ◽  
Double Blind Trial ◽  
Hemodynamic Responses ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
American Society ◽  
Group B

Background: Dexmedetomidine is selective alpha 2 agonist with sedative sympatholytic, analgesic properties and is used as an anaesthetic adjuvant. We have evaluated the effect of dexmedetomidine on various hemodynamic responses to incidences such as laryngoscopy, endotracheal intubation, exubation and pneumoperitoneum in patients who were undergoing surgeries like laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We have used loading dose of 0.5mcg/kg of inj. Dexmedetomidine given over 10 minutes followed by infusion of a dose of 0.3mcg/kg/hour for the control of hemodynamic response to laparoscopy. Methods: Patient of either sex aged between 18-50 yrs, belongs to ASA I and II (AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY) posted for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included. Institutional ethical committee clearance was obtained prior to study. After enrolment and valid written consent was taken. 60 patients were enrolled written valid informed consent was taken. Patients were divided into two groups 30 each with computerized randomization. Base line parameters were noted. Observer and patient was blinded for the content of syringe. Group A received injection dexmedetomidine and group B received bolus and infusion of normal saline at same rate. Routine general anaesthesia was instituted. Parameters were noted after induction, after intubation, after co2 insufflation, after 20 min, after 40 min, after co2 deflation, after extubation, after 1 and 2 hrs post-extubation. Results: Group A showed significantly less rise in HR and MAP than Group B. Requirement of intraoperative propofol was more in Group B. There was no significant difference for time taken to awakening in both groups. Conclusion: We found Injection Dexmedetomidine in given doses gave good hemodynamic control with minimal undesired effects during laparoscopy.

A Double-Blind Trial of Bradilan (Tetranicotinoylfructose) in Perniosis in General Practice

1974 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
F de S Donnan
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Placebo Group ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Double Blind Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Trial ◽  
The Difference

An initial double-blind cross-over study and a subsequent double-blind comparative study against placebo tablets has shown Bradilan (tetranicotinoylfructose) to be an effective treatment of chilblains. The difference between the active and placebo group was highly significant statistically with p < ·001

A Multicentre Double Blind Trial of Fluoxetine versus Amitriptyline in the Treatment of Depressive Illness

1993 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona K. Judd ◽  
Kate Moore ◽  
Trevor R. Norman ◽  
Graham D. Burrows ◽  
Ramesh K. Gupta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Serotonin Reuptake ◽  
Depressive Illness ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Side Effect Profile ◽  
Double Blind Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Antidepressant Efficacy ◽  
To Receive

The antidepressant efficacy and side effect profile of a fixed dose of 20 mg/day of fluoxetine, a specific serotonin reuptake inhibitor, were compared to those of amitriptyline. Fifty-eight patients with DSM-III-R depression were randomly assigned to receive either fluoxetine or amitriptyline. Fifty-six patients (fluoxetine N = 23, amitriptyline N = 23) completed the 6 week study. Comparable antidepressant efficacy was demonstrated for the two drugs. Patients taking fluoxetine reported less side-effects than those taking amitriptyline.

Clonazepam in Acute Mania: A Double Blind Trial

1991 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rod Edwards ◽  
Una Stephenson ◽  
Tom Flewett
Keyword(s):  
Placebo Group ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Psychotic Symptoms ◽  
Double Blind Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Trial ◽  
Medication Side Effects ◽  
Sedative Effects ◽  
Medication Side ◽  
Manic Patients

In a double-blind trial involving acutely manic patients, clonazepam was compared to placebo, both groups receiving chlorpromazine as needed. The group receiving clonazepam showed significantly more improvement in their manic but not their psychotic symptoms compared to the placebo group. This effect was not primarily related to the sedative effects of clonazepam. Clonazepam tended to reduce the need for phenothiazine medication. Side effects related to sedation were more common to the clonazepam group. These findings are the first to indicate that clonazepam may have a specific antimanic effect over and above that of phenothiazines alone.

Oral Buflomedil in Diabetic Background Retinopathy: Results of a Preliminary Controlled Study

1984 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 184-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Ducrey ◽  
B Curchod
Keyword(s):  
Placebo Group ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Double Blind Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Trial ◽  
Background Retinopathy ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Insulin Dependent ◽  
Insulin Dependent Diabetic

Twenty insulin-dependent diabetic patients with signs of background retinopathy were given Buflomedil 600 mg/day orally or placebo in a randomized double-blind trial for a 6-month period. A larger number of patients had their retinal condition deteriorating in the placebo group and this finding is an indication for pursuing investigations on a larger scale in this direction.

Effects of Oros-mph on Adult Patients with ADHD - Results of the German Subpopulation of the European Lamda Trial (42603ATT3002/-3004)

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (S1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
A. Philipsen ◽  
E. Sobanski ◽  
M. Roesler ◽  
M. Gerwe ◽  
G.E. Trott
Keyword(s):  
Placebo Group ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Open Label Extension ◽  
Health Related Qol ◽  
Full Study ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Dose Trial

Although well-studied in children, MPH is not approved for the treatment of ADHD in adults in Germany. We report the findings from the German subgroup of the European LAMDA trial.Patients (18-65 years) with ADHD (DSM-IV) were treated in this 5-week double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, fixed dose trial with 18, 36, 72-mg/day OROS-MPH or placebo. Eligible patients continued into the subsequent 7-week open-label extension-phase starting with 18 mg/day OROS-MPH.108 patients entered the double-blind phase, which was completed by 89.9%. the open-label phase was completed by 92.6%. Concerning CAARS:O-SV total scores (LOCF), mean changes from baseline to double-blind endpoint in were -9.6±10.6 (18-mg), -13.3±10.3 (36-mg) and -12.7±10.7 (72-mg) vs. -8.2±8.4 (placebo group). Mean changes from start of open-label phase to endpoint were -17.5 in patients who received OROS-MPH and -16.5, who received placebo in double-blind phase. Mean Q-LES-Q-SF scores (health-related QoL) improved from baseline in all treatment groups in the double-blind phase, and continued to improve in the open-label phase. AE occurred in 77.4% (18-mg), 85.7% (36-mg), 77.4% (72-mg) and 65.5% (placebo group). Most common AE were decreased appetite, headache, nasopharyngitits and weight decreased. No statistically significant changes in mean blood pressure were observed in the double-blind or open-label phases. Mean pulse increased by 7.0 bpm (72-mg group) at week 5 (p=0.025) and by 7.9 bpm in all patients at week 12 (p< 0.001).This analysis of the German subpopulation is in line with results of the full study, showing that OROS-MPH is effective and well tolerated in adults with ADHD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document