scholarly journals Evaluation of effectiveness of rupatadine and olopatadine in patients of allergic rhinitis at Indore: a randomized control trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (7) ◽  
pp. 1753
Author(s):  
Jay Shah ◽  
Poonam Patel
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Nasal Symptom ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Differential Count ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
College Hospital ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Parallel Group

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is one of the most prevalent atopic disorders that affect productivity and quality of life. Although individually olopatadine and rupatadine are efficacious in AR, data on the head to head study of these drugs in Indian population are scanty, so present study was undertaken with an aim to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost effectiveness of rupatadine and olopatadine in patients’ of allergic rhinitis.Methods: A prospective, randomized, double blind, parallel group, comparative 2 weeks clinical study conducted in eighty patients of AR in the Department of Pharmacology, Index Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, Indore. Following inclusion and exclusion criteria, 67 patients were recruited and randomized to two treatment groups and received the respective drugs for 2 weeks. At follow-up, parameters assessed were total nasal symptom score (TNSS), change in total and differential count of eosinophil.Results: In olopatadine group, there was a significantly higher reduction in TNSS (P < 0.05) than that of rupatadine. Both the drugs significantly reduced the absolute eosinophil count, but olopatadine (P <0.001) was found to be superior. The incidence of adverse effects was found to be less in olopatadine group when compared with rupatadine group.Conclusions: Both rupatadine and olopatadine provide effective relief of the symptoms of AR. However, clinical benefit occurs significantly more with olopatadine. However, rupatadine was more cost‑effective than olopatadine in treating the patients of AR in term of effectiveness.

scholarly journals Comparative study of efficacy of nifedipine, nitroglycerin dermal patches and isoxsuprine as tocolytic agents in suppression of preterm labour 1-year study at navodaya medical college hospital and research centre Raichur

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 2806
Author(s):  
Rita D. ◽  
V. Haripriya
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Preterm Labour ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
College Hospital ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Uterine Contractions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Tocolytic Agent ◽  
Tocolytic Agents

Background: Tocolytic agents are used to reduce preterm deliveries. Very few studies documenting the comparison of tocolytic agents viz. nifedipine, nitroglycerin dermal patches and isoxsuprine. Other drugs are not used due to their adverse effects. Objective was to study and compare the safety efficacy of nifedipine, nitroglycerin dermal patches and isoxsuprine as tocolytic agents in suppression of preterm labour 1 year study.Methods: This was a prospective case control study was conducted for a period of 1 year. Total 90 cases selected to study were randomly distribute in to three treatment groups viz. A, B, and C nifedipine, nitroglycerin and isoxsuprine respectively. Subjects in all three groups were evaluated for maternal pulse rate, palpitation uterine contractions and fetal heart rate in order to assess efficacy of each drug under investigation.Results: There was no statistically significant difference in age of woman’s in three different groups. Among (100%) subjects, majority of the cases i.e. (27.8%) primi gravida followed by multi (72.2%). Side effects of nifedipine was less when compared to nitroglycerine dermal patch and isoxsuprine i/v/o of headache (8.9%), nausea (1.1%), vomiting (1.1%), tachycardia (3.3%), palpitation (3.3%), hypotension (1.1%). side effects were statistically significant different between the treatment groups. There was no statistically significant difference with respect to APGAR score at 1 minute and 5 minutes.Conclusions: Oral nifedipine was found to be superior and efficacious as tocolytic agent as compared to transdermal nitroglycerin and intravenous isoxsuprine.

scholarly journals Pharmacoeconomic assessment and comparing efficacy between cetirizine, levocetirizine, loratadine and fexofenadine in allergic rhinitis patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 2684
Author(s):  
Ganesh S. Pentewar ◽  
Ranjit J. Wagh ◽  
Aparna S. Chincholkar
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Indirect Costs ◽  
Nasal Symptom ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Bonferroni Adjustment ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Comparative Clinical Study ◽  
Analysis Of Results

Background: A successful treatment of allergic rhinitis is considered not only as relief from sneezing, itching, rhinorrhoea, congestion but also as the functional impact on the patient’s daily life. The cost of treating allergic rhinitis and indirect costs related to loss of workplace productivity are substantial.Methods: The present study was single centered, open label, randomized, four Arm, parallel-group, comparative clinical study between orally administered Cetirizine, Levocetirizine, Loratadine and Fexofenatidine in patients with allergic rhinitis conducted at MIMER Medical college and Dr. Bhausaheb Sardesai hospital in rural Maval Taluka in Pune district of Maharashtra State.Results: Total Nasal Symptom Score differs significantly for all the treatment groups. Subsequent pairwise contrasts using a Bonferroni adjustment reveals maximum reduction of symptoms in Levocetirizine group. Cost effectiveness ratio was effective for Levocetirizine followed by Cetirizine, Loratadine, and Fexofenadine.Conclusions: From the analysis of results, the study shows that both Levocetirizine and Cetirizine control the symptoms of allergic rhinitis better as compared to Loratadine and Fexofenadine but Levocetirizine was a better choice in comparison to others due to its cost effectiveness.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of So-Cheong-Ryong-Tang in treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis: study protocol for a double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, multicentre trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e016556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min-Hee Kim ◽  
Youme Ko ◽  
Jin-Hyang Ahn ◽  
Younghee Yun ◽  
Mi-Na Yun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Multicentre Trial ◽  
Medical Centre ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Total Serum ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Perennial Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Parallel Group

IntroductionSo-Cheong-Ryong-Tang (SCRT) is a herbal medicine widely used in traditional medicine for treating allergic rhinitis (AR). In animal studies, SCRT has suppressed the progression of AR. The main purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of the SCRT for the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) and discover the underlying mechanisms resulting in anti-inflammatory effects in humans.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre trial of Korean adults with PAR. For the study, 156 subjects with PAR will be recruited. The trial will consist of a 4-week oral administration of SCRT or placebo with two visits at 2-week intervals and an 8-week follow-up period with two visits at 4-week intervals. The primary outcome is a change in the total nasal symptoms score. The secondary outcomes include changes in the Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire score, total serum IgE and cytokines levels.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at each research centre (name of each centres and approval numbers): Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong (KHNMC-OH-IRB 2015-04-009), Kyung Hee University Medical Centre (KOMCIRB-160321-HRBR-011), Pusan National University Hospital (2016–004), Dongguk University Medical Centre (2016–03) and Semyung University hospital (2016–01). This result will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT03009136; Pre-results.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Comparative Efficacy of Jyotishmati (Celastrus paniculatus Wild) and Yastimadhu (Glycyrrhiza glabra Linn) in Enhancing IQ and Memory of Different Prakriti School Going Children-A Study Protocol of Double Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 236-244
Author(s):  
Ibamedabha Japang ◽  
Renu Rathi ◽  
Bharat Rathi ◽  
Jitesh Verma ◽  
V. B. Pandey
Keyword(s):  
School Performance ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
School Age ◽  
Comparative Efficacy ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
College Hospital ◽  
Memory Assessment ◽  
Parallel Group

Background: Education plays a major role in life, whereas lack of intelligence, learning, and memory will lead to failure in school performance and school dropout. Medhya drugs are used frequently to enhance the memory and IQ in children. Jyotishmati and Yashtimadhu are medhya (IQ-enhancing & memory-booster) drugs, described in numerous classical texts of Ayurveda. However, comparative efficacy and randomized trials on various prakriti types have not been studied. Thus, to assess the comparative efficacy of Jyotishmati in enhancing IQ and memory in relation to Yastimadhu as standard control, this research has been planned. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of Jyotishmati on IQ and memory, and compare the efficacy with that of Yastimadhu in children with different prakriti types. Methodology: It will be conducted on healthy school-age children of 8-13 years, recruited from CBSE schools near Mahatma Gandhi Ayurved College, Hospital and Research Centre, Salod, Wardha. The study will be a randomized, standard-controlled, double-blind, parallel group clinical study. All participants will be randomly divided into two groups, each of 30 individuals; each group is subdivided into three subgroups of 10 individuals each. One group will be given Jyotishmati while the other will be given Yastimadhu, both in granule form. IQ assessment will be done by using the Draw a Man test and the PGI memory scale for memory assessment. Expected Results: This study will validate the efficacy of Jyotishmati and Yastimadhuin enhancing IQ and memory, and it will give detailed information about their efficacy in different Prakriti dominantchildren. Conclusion: This study will provide unique information to increase awareness of the administration of Medhya drugs according to Prakriti, as well as knowledge about which drug is best for improving either IQ or memory, or both.

SIGNIFICANCE OF PLACENTAL HISTOPATHOLOGICAL FINDINGS IN PRETERM/TERM BIRTH

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika Kushwaha ◽  
Sanjeev Narang
Keyword(s):  
Preterm Birth ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Pregnancy Outcome ◽  
Neonatal Morbidity ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
College Hospital ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Chorionic Villi ◽  
Term Birth ◽  
Medical College

Background: This study is cross-sectional, observational and comparative study, at Index Medical College, Hospital & Research Centre, Indore, Madhya Pradesh from July 2017 to July 2019 with sample size 100 placentae. Method: The placenta received was evaluated blinded of maternal pregnancy outcome. The pattern of morphology was evaluated both qualitatively (type of lesion) and quantitatively (number of lesions). Result: In Present study 79% of the deliveries were term deliveries and 21% were preterm deliveries. On placental macroscopy, placenta weight was significantly low among the neonates of preterm deliveries (370.00±60.49) as compared to term deliveries (440.89±55.22). Preterm placenta had higher number of abnormal placental lesion compared to term pregnancies. Conclusion: The uteroplacental insufficiency defined as placental infarct, fibrosis of chorionic villi, thickening of blood vessels, and poor vascularity of chorionic villi. Placental histopathological lesions are strongly associated with maternal under perfusion and uteroplacental insufficiency. These are the reasons for preterm birth. Thus, knowledge of the etiological factor can be use to reduce maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortility. Keywords: Placenta, Term & Preterm.

Brompheniramine Maleate: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Comparison with Terfenadine for Symptoms of Allergic Rhinitis

1998 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 293-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
William R. Thoden ◽  
Howard M. Druce ◽  
Sandy A. Furey ◽  
Earle A. Lockhart ◽  
Paul Ratner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Symptom Severity ◽  
Extended Release ◽  
Nasal Symptom ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Release Formulation ◽  
Extended Release Formulation ◽  
Adverse Experiences ◽  
Severity Scores ◽  
Brompheniramine Maleate

This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter, parallel study comparing the effectiveness, at recommended doses, of an extended-release formulation of brompheniramine maleate and terfenadine in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Subjects with symptoms of seasonal and/or perennial allergic rhinitis received brompheniramine 12 mg (n = 106), 8 mg (n = 105), terfenadine 60 mg (n = 106), or placebo (n = 53) twice daily for 14 days. On treatment days 3, 7, and 14, symptom severity ratings (i.e., rhinorrhea, sneezing, nasal congestion, itchy nose, eyes or throat, excessive tearing, postnasal drip) were completed by the physician; subjects and physicians each completed a global efficacy evaluation. Brompheniramine 12 mg and 8 mg and terfenadine were more effective than placebo (p ≤ 0.05) on the physicians’ global; brompheniramine 12 mg was more effective than terfenadine (p ≤ 0.05) on days 7 and 14 and brompheniramine 8 mg on day 3. On the subjects’ global evaluation, brompheniramine 12 mg and 8 mg and terfenadine were more effective than placebo (p ≤ 0.05); brompheniramine 12 mg was more effective than terfenadine (p ≤ 0.05) on days 7 and 14 and brompheniramine 8 mg on day 3. In general, brompheniramine 8 mg was comparable to terfenadine. On days 3 and 7, the total symptom and total nasal symptom severity scores for subjects receiving brompheniramine 12 mg were significantly more improved than for placebo (p < 0.05); terfenadine was not different from placebo; brompheniramine 12 mg was significantly better than terfenadine on day 7 (p < 0.05) for reducing total symptom severity and on days 3, 7, and 14 for reducing total nasal symptom severity. Adverse experiences were reported by 155 (41.9%) of the 370 subjects enrolled in the study. The overall rate of adverse experiences in the brompheniramine 12 mg treatment group (57.5%) was significantly greater (p < 0.05) than for brompheniramine 8 mg (38.1%), terfenadine (31.1%), and placebo (39.6%). In conclusion, an extended-release formulation of brompheniramine 12 mg or 8 mg bid alleviates allergic rhinitis symptoms and brompheniramine 12 mg provides significantly better relief of these symptoms than terfenadine 60 mg bid.

Comparative Efficacy of Once Daily Loratadine versus Terfenadine in the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis

1989 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. H. Banov
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Initial Dose ◽  
Small Sample Size ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Excellent Response ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Parallel Group Trial ◽  
Group Trial

This 1 week study compared the efficacy of once daily administration of 10 mg loratadine with 120 mg terfenadine in out-patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. It focussed on the efficacy of treatment at the end of the 24 h period following a daily dose. The study was designed as a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trial, and 41 patients were enrolled and evaluated for efficacy. Patients took an initial dose at the study site and returned on days 2 and 8. At day 2 (24 h after the initial dose), according to the physician's evaluation 57% of loratadine-treated patients had a good or excellent response, compared to 50% of those given terfenadine. At day 8, 24 h after the final dose, 71% of the loratadine-treated patients and 35% of the terfenadine-treated patients had a good or excellent response ( P = 0.03). At days 2 and 8, reductions in mean symptom scores measured 22, 23 and 24 h after the initial and final doses showed an indication of being greater with loratadine than with terfenadine (non-significant due to small sample size). The incidence of sedation was similar in both groups. It is concluded that 10 mg loratadine, administered once daily, controls the symptoms of rhinitis more effectively than 120 mg terfenadine given once daily in the last few hours of the 24 h dosing period.

scholarly journals HISTOMORPHOLOGICAL SPECTRUM OF LESIONS OF HYSTERECTOMY SPECIMENS IN GCS MEDICAL COLLEGE, HOSPITALAND RESEARCH CENTER, AHMEDABAD : A STUDY OF 100 CASES

2020 ◽  
pp. 80-82
Author(s):  
Shweta Shah ◽  
S.K. Suri ◽  
Ami Shah
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Total Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Abdominal Hysterectomy ◽  
Medical College Hospital ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Gynaecological Surgery ◽  
College Hospital ◽  
Medical College

Background: Most frequently performed gynaecological surgery is hysterectomy. The prevalence of hysterectomy varies within different regions. There are mainly two types of hysterectomies according to which part of uterus is removed. The main types of hysterectomy are total and subtotal or partial hysterectomy. The hysterectomy can be performed by three routes abdominal, laproscopic and vaginal hysterectomy. The main objective of our study is to know most common pathology and different age groups of the patients underwent hysterectomy. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study was carried during period 6 months, at GCS medical college, hospital and research centre, Ahmedabad. Total 100 hysterectomy specimens were analyzed for histopathological lesions. We had taken the clinical and histopathological findings of these cases from the records of department of pathology, GCS medical college , hospital and research centre. Results: In our study of 100 cases, most common age group underwent hysterectomy was 40-49 years and least common age group was 20-29 years. Type of hysterectomy performed most commonly in this study was total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingoophorectomy. Most of lesions were seen in the myometrium 42 cases (42%), Endometrium 32 cases (32%), Cervix 16 cases (16%) and Ovary 10 cases (10%). Hysterectomy remains the widely used treatment modality.

A Parallel-Group Comparison of Astemizole and Loratadine for the Treatment of Perennial Allergic Rhinitis

1997 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 175-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Al-Muhaimeed
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Perennial Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Runny Nose ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
The Mean ◽  
To Receive

The efficacy and safety of the two antihistamines, astemizole and loratadine, were compared in a double-blind study of 84 patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. Patients were randomized to receive orally either astemizole 10 mg once daily ( n = 40) or loratadine 10 mg once daily ( n = 44) for 1 week. No other antirhinitis medication was allowed during the study. By day 7 the mean daily symptom scores, recorded on diary cards, were lower in patients receiving astemizole than in those receiving loratadine for runny nose, itchy nose and sneezing, although not for blocked nose, and treatment differences only reached statistical significance for runny nose. After 7 days, 53.75% of patients on astemizole and 38.6% on loratadine were free of symptoms, and 87% of patients on astemizole described the treatment as good or excellent compared with 62% on loratadine. The present results suggest that astemizole may be more effective than loratadine in controlling symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document