scholarly journals Inhaled budesonide for adults with mild-to-moderate asthma: a randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial

2001 ◽  
Vol 119 (5) ◽  
pp. 169-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Luisa Godoy Fernandes ◽  
Sonia Maria Faresin ◽  
Maria Marta Amorim ◽  
Carlos Cézar Fritscher ◽  
Carlos Alberto de Castro Pereira ◽  
...  

CONTEXT: Budesonide is an inhaled corticosteroid with high topical potency and low systemic activity recommended in the treatment of chronic asthma. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of inhaled budesonide via a breath-activated, multi-dose, dry-powder inhaler. TYPE OF STUDY: Multicenter randomized parallel-group, placebo-controlled, double-blind, clinical trial. SETTING: Multicenter study in the university units. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with mild-to-moderate asthma that was not controlled using bronchodilator therapy alone. PROCEDURES: Comparison of budesonide 400 µg administered twice daily via a breath-activated, multi-dose, dry-powder inhaler with placebo, in 43 adult patients (aged 15 to 78 years) with mild-to-moderate asthma (FEV1 71% of predicted normal) that was not controlled using bronchodilator therapy alone. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Efficacy was assessed by pulmonary function tests and asthma symptom control (as perceived by the patients) and the use of rescue medication. RESULTS: Budesonide 400 µg (bid) was significantly more effective than placebo in improving morning peak expiratory flow (mean difference: 67.9 l/min; P < 0.005) and FEV1 (mean difference: 0.60 l; P < 0.005) over the 8-week treatment period. Onset of action, assessed by morning peak expiratory flow, occurred within the first two weeks of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide via a breath-activated, multi-dose, dry-powder inhaler results in a rapid onset of asthma control, which is maintained over time and is well tolerated in adults with mild-to-moderate asthma.

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Papi ◽  
Brunilda Marku ◽  
Nicola Scichilone ◽  
Piero Maestrelli ◽  
Pierluigi Paggiaro ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-106
Author(s):  
Mohammadreza Maleki Verki ◽  
Kambiz Masoumi ◽  
Hassan Motamed ◽  
Meisam Moezi ◽  
Arash Forouzan ◽  
...  

Background:More than half of the patients attending emergency centers need analgesics. Injectable analgesics are currently the most common pain control strategy, but entail complications. Fentanyl is one of the most commonly used pain-relief opiates available in various forms.Objective:The present study aims to compare analgesic effects of nebulized against intravenous fentanyl for controlling pain due to limb fracture.Method:The present double-blind clinical trial recruited 213 patients presenting with fractured limbs to emergency departments. The first group of patients received 1 micg/kg of intravenous fentanyl citrate from a solution of 50 micg/ml and 5 ml of normal saline in nebulized form (group A), and the second group intravenously received 5 ml of normal saline and 4 micg/kg of 50 micg/ml solution of fentanyl citrate in nebulized form, whose volume reached 5 ml with the addition of normal saline (group B). Then, pain level was frequently measured and compared in the two groups for 20 minutes.Results:The results obtained showed reduced pain level in both the groups. However, point-by-point comparison of pain in the two groups revealed significantly greater pain reduction in intravenous fentanyl group (P<0.001). The need for adjuvant pain relief medication was 8.3% in intravenous fentanyl group and 24% in nebulized fentanyl group, with a significant difference between the two groups (P=0.002).Conclusion:According to the results, although nebulized fentanyl is effective in controlling pain due to limb fracture, it was less effective than intravenous type, and unable to control pain in many cases.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document