RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the analgetic efficacy and side-effects of Naproxen and Tramadol following the outpatient VABRA aspiration or hysterosalpingography. SETTING: Ninety-one patients from the gynaecology clinics of two university hospitals and one municipal-teaching hospital. DESIGN: Multicentre double blind randomized clinical trial. Computerised randomisation, stratification per-centre. METHODS: Semiquantitative assessment of the two drugs was performed by the patient and the gynaecologist using a 1- to 6-point scale. Pain, stress and well-being was scored by the patient using the visual analog scale (VAS) and the verbal description scale (VDS), ranging from 0 (good) to 100 (bad). Side-effects during the first 24 h postoperatively were recorded by the patient in a diary. RESULTS: The analgetic efficacy (pain, stress and well-being) of Naproxen and Tramadol was identical. Subjective assessment by the patient and the doctor also revealed no differences between Naproxen and Tramadol. Side-effects of Tramadol, however, were significantly more severe than those of Naproxen and this phenomenon was responsible for a lower ability to proceed with normal activities in the Tramadol group. CONCLUSION: Tramadol is a good alternative for Naproxen at outpatient VABRA or HSG procedures when Naproxen is contra-indicated.
Asunto(s)
Atención Ambulatoria/métodos , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/uso terapéutico , Naproxeno/uso terapéutico , Dolor/tratamiento farmacológico , Tramadol/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/efectos adversos , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/efectos adversos , Catecolaminas/farmacología , Legrado/efectos adversos , Método Doble Ciego , Hemodinámica/efectos de los fármacos , Humanos , Histerosalpingografía/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Naproxeno/efectos adversos , Tramadol/efectos adversosRESUMEN
A double-blind, randomised study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of a combination of pefloxacin and metronidazole versus doxycycline and metronidazole in patients with pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). The clinical diagnosis had to be confirmed by laparoscopy before patients were included. Of the 74 patients who fulfilled the clinical criteria for PID, laparoscopy confirmed the diagnosis in only 40 patients (54%). The microorganism most frequently found as causative pathogen was Chlamydia trachomatis. Both treatment groups showed a good response to the study-medication. At discharge 9 patients in the pefloxacin group (45%) were cured and 10 patients (50%) had improved. In the doxycycline group 7 patients (35%) were cured and 10 patients (50%) had improved. Obviously pefloxacin/metronidazole and doxycycline/metronidazole are equally effective in the treatment of PID.