Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
1.
Ann Emerg Med ; 49(4): 468-80, 480.e1-2, 2007 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17113683

RESUMO

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This randomized, multicenter study compares the analgesic efficacy and safety of tramadol/acetaminophen versus hydrocodone/acetaminophen versus placebo for the treatment of acute musculoskeletal pain caused by ankle sprain. METHODS: Adults were enrolled with ankle sprain with a diagnosis of partial ligament tear, pain visual analog scale score of 50 to 100 mm (0="no pain," 100="extreme pain"), and pain numeric rating scale score of 2 to 3 (0="none," 3="severe"). Patients reported pain intensity on these scales and pain relief (-1="pain worse," 4="complete relief") hourly for 4 hours after the first dose of tramadol/acetaminophen 75 mg/650 mg, hydrocodone/acetaminophen 7.5 mg/650 mg, or placebo, and daily for 5 days, with as-needed dosing. RESULTS: Tramadol/acetaminophen (n=192) and hydrocodone/acetaminophen (n=204) provided greater total pain relief than placebo (n=207; P<.001) during the first 4 hours (mean scores [95% confidence interval (CI)] 6.6 [95% CI 6.1 to 7.1], 6.8 [95% CI 6.3 to 7.3], and 5.4 [95% CI 4.9 to 5.9], respectively; possible range -4 to 16), decreased pain intensity during the first 4 hours, and increased average pain relief on days 1 to 5. No efficacy measure was significantly different between the tramadol/acetaminophen and hydrocodone/acetaminophen groups. Common adverse events included somnolence, nausea, dizziness, and vomiting. CONCLUSION: One or 2 capsules of 37.5 mg tramadol/325 mg acetaminophen and 1 capsule of 7.5 mg hydrocodone/650 mg acetaminophen were well tolerated, had comparable clinical utility, and were more effective than placebo in the management of acute musculoskeletal pain caused by ankle sprain.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Traumatismos do Tornozelo/tratamento farmacológico , Hidrocodona/uso terapêutico , Entorses e Distensões/tratamento farmacológico , Tramadol/uso terapêutico , Acetaminofen/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Combinação de Medicamentos , Humanos , Masculino , Medição da Dor
2.
Clin Ther ; 27(9): 1420-31, 2005 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16291415

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to further assess the long-term safety and effectiveness of open-label topiramate therapy in subjects with moderately to severely painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). METHODS: Adults aged 18 to 75 years received open-label topiramate (25-600 mg/d for 26 weeks) in an extension of a previously published randomized, double-blind trial comparing topiramate with placebo. Safety analyses included adverse event (AE) reports and clinical laboratory tests. Metabolic end points included body weight and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)). Effectiveness analyses included a 100-mm pain visual analog (PVA) scale, worst and current pain severity, and sleep disruption. RESULTS: Two hundred five subjects participated in this open-label extension study (118 formerly treated with topiramate and 87 who formerly received placebo). The groups did not differ in baseline demographics or disease characteristics. One hundred twenty-four (60.5%) subjects (68.6% of former topiramate recipients and 49.4% of former placebo recipients) completed the extension study; the most common reason for discontinuation was an AE (27.3% of subjects). AEs among subjects who received > or =1 dose of topiramate (n = 298) included upper respiratory tract infection (16.1%), anorexia (15.1%), diarrhea (12.8%), nausea (12.8%), paresthesia (10.7%), and headache (10.1%). Baseline pain scores were lower in those formerly treated with topiramate (n = 117) than in the former placebo group (n = 86) (PVA: 43.3 vs 52.5, P = 0.014; worst pain: 1.9 vs 2.5, P < 0.001; current pain: 1.6 vs 1.9, P = 0.026; sleep disruption: 3.6 vs 4.6, P = 0.021). At the final visit, PVA, current pain, and sleep disruption scores were not significantly different between the former topiramate and former placebo groups, but worst pain differed significantly (1.4 vs 1.8; P = 0.025). Mean weight loss from the start of topiramate therapy was 5.2 and 5.3 kg in the former topiramate and former placebo groups, respectively (P < 0.001 vs baseline). Mean HbA(1c) values before and after topiramate treatment were 7.7% and 7.4%, respectively, in the former topiramate group (P = 0.004 vs baseline), and 7.6% and 7.1%, respectively, in the former placebo group (P < 0.001 vs baseline). CONCLUSION: Although 39.5% of subjects discontinued, most often due to AEs, the results of this 26-week, open-label extension study with topiramate (up to 600 mg/d) in subjects with moderately to severely painful DPN suggest that pain relief was effective and durable.


Assuntos
Anticonvulsivantes/uso terapêutico , Neuropatias Diabéticas/tratamento farmacológico , Frutose/análogos & derivados , Dor/prevenção & controle , Privação do Sono/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Anorexia/etiologia , Anticonvulsivantes/administração & dosagem , Anticonvulsivantes/efeitos adversos , Peso Corporal/efeitos dos fármacos , Neuropatias Diabéticas/complicações , Diarreia/etiologia , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Frutose/administração & dosagem , Frutose/efeitos adversos , Frutose/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Dor/etiologia , Medição da Dor , Infecções Respiratórias/etiologia , Privação do Sono/etiologia , Fatores de Tempo , Topiramato
3.
Pain ; 109(3): 250-257, 2004 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15157685

RESUMO

The objective of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of tramadol/acetaminophen (APAP) (total dose 75 mg/650 mg) and tramadol (total dose 100 mg) for the control of pain after oral surgery. A total of 456 patients with moderate-to-severe pain within 5 h after extraction of two or more third molars were randomized to receive two identical encapsulated tablets containing tramadol/APAP 37.5 mg/325 mg, tramadol 50 mg, or placebo. Tramadol/APAP was superior to tramadol (P < 0.001) or placebo (P < 0.001) on all efficacy measures: total pain relief (PAR) over 6 h (7.4, 2.5, and 1.5, respectively, on a scale of 0-24); sum of pain intensity differences (PIDs) (3.1, 0.6, and 0.1, respectively, on a scale of -6 to 18); and sum of PAR and PID (10.5, 3.1, and 1.6, respectively, on a scale of -6 to 42). Median times to onset of perceptible and meaningful PAR were 37.6 and 126.5 min, respectively, for the tramadol/APAP group (P < 0.001) for each, compared with tramadol and placebo arms). The most common adverse events with active treatment were nausea, dizziness, and vomiting; these events occurred more frequently in the tramadol group than in the tramadol/APAP group. This study established the superiority of tramadol/APAP 75 mg/650 mg over tramadol 100 mg in the treatment of acute pain following oral surgery.


Assuntos
Acetaminofen/administração & dosagem , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Odontalgia/tratamento farmacológico , Tramadol/administração & dosagem , Acetaminofen/efeitos adversos , Adolescente , Adulto , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/efeitos adversos , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Tontura/induzido quimicamente , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Sinergismo Farmacológico , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Náusea/induzido quimicamente , Medição da Dor , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Dor Pós-Operatória/psicologia , Odontalgia/etiologia , Odontalgia/psicologia , Tramadol/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
Curr Med Res Opin ; 23(1): 147-61, 2007 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17257476

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy and safety of tramadol/acetaminophen (APAP) for the management of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). METHODS: Adults with painful DPN involving the lower extremities received 37.5 mg tramadol/325 mg APAP or placebo, up to 1-2 tablets four times daily, for 66 days. Subjects rated average daily pain and sleep interference from 0 ('none') to 10 ('pain as bad as you can imagine' or 'complete interference') every night. Baseline values were recorded for 7 days before starting study medication. The primary endpoint was change in mean of average daily pain scores from baseline to final week. Secondary efficacy outcomes included pain intensity, sleep interference, quality of life, mood, and global impression of change. Potential study limitations included permission to use serotonin reuptake inhibitors concomitantly (except venlafaxine or duloxetine) and the lack of a tramadol-alone or APAP-alone control group. RESULTS: A total of 160 subjects received tramadol/APAP and 153 received placebo. Tramadol/APAP reduced average daily pain significantly compared to placebo from baseline to the final week (-2.71 vs. -1.83, p = 0.001). Tramadol/APAP was associated with significantly greater improvement than placebo (p < or = 0.05) for all measures of pain intensity, sleep interference, and global impression, as well as several measures of quality of life and mood. The only adverse event reported by > 10% of subjects in either the tramadol/APAP or placebo group was nausea (11.9% and 3.3%, respectively). Adverse events resulted in early study discontinuation for 8.1% and 6.5% of subjects in the tramadol/APAP and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Tramadol/APAP was more effective than placebo and was well tolerated in the management of painful DPN.


Assuntos
Acetaminofen/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Neuropatias Diabéticas/tratamento farmacológico , Tramadol/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Idoso , Análise de Variância , Neuropatias Diabéticas/psicologia , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Transtornos do Humor/psicologia , Medição da Dor , Placebos , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Qualidade de Vida , Sono/efeitos dos fármacos , Comprimidos , Resultado do Tratamento
5.
Headache ; 47(2): 170-80, 2007 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17300356

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of topiramate (100 mg/day) compared with placebo for the treatment of chronic migraine. METHODS: This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study consisting of 16 weeks of double-blind treatment. Subjects aged 18 to 65 years with 15 or more headache days per month, at least half of which were migraine/migrainous headaches, were randomized 1:1 to either topiramate 100 mg/day or placebo. An initial dose of topiramate 25 mg/day (or placebo) was titrated upward in weekly increments of 25 mg/day to a maximum of 100 mg/day (or to the maximum tolerated dose). Concomitant preventive migraine treatment was not allowed, and acute headache medication use was not to exceed 4 days per week during the double-blind maintenance period. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in the mean monthly number of migraine/migrainous days; the change in the mean monthly number of migraine days also was analyzed. A fixed sequence approach (ie, gatekeeper approach) using analysis of covariance was used to analyze the efficacy endpoints. Assessments of safety and tolerability included physical and neurologic examinations, clinical laboratory parameters, and spontaneous reports of clinical adverse events. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population included 306 (topiramate, n = 153; placebo, n = 153) of 328 randomized subjects who provided at least 1 efficacy assessment; 55.8% of the topiramate group and 55.2% on placebo were trial completers. The mean final topiramate maintenance dose was 86.0 mg/day. The mean duration of therapy was 91.7 days for the topiramate group and 90.6 days for the placebo group. Topiramate treatment resulted in a statistically significant mean reduction of migraine/migrainous headache days (topiramate -6.4 vs placebo -4.7, P= .010) and migraine headache days relative to baseline (topiramate -5.6 vs placebo -4.1, P= .032). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 132 (82.5%) and 113 (70.2%) of topiramate-treated and placebo-treated subjects, respectively, and were generally of mild or moderate severity. Most commonly reported adverse events in the topiramate group were paresthesia (n = 46, 28.8%), upper respiratory tract infection (n = 22, 13.8%), and fatigue (n = 19, 11.9%). The most common adverse events in the placebo group were upper respiratory tract infection (n = 20, 12.4%), fatigue (n = 16, 9.9%), and nausea (n = 13, 8.1%). Discontinuations due to adverse events occurred in 18 (10.9%) topiramate subjects and 10 (6.1%) placebo subjects. There were no serious adverse events or deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Topiramate treatment at daily doses of approximately 100 mg resulted in statistically significant improvements compared with placebo in mean monthly migraine/migrainous and migraine headache days. Topiramate is safe and generally well tolerated in this group of subjects with chronic migraine, a burdensome condition with important unmet treatment needs. Safety and tolerability of topiramate were consistent with experience in previous clinical trials involving the drug.


Assuntos
Anticonvulsivantes/uso terapêutico , Frutose/análogos & derivados , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/tratamento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Anticonvulsivantes/efeitos adversos , Doença Crônica , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Frutose/efeitos adversos , Frutose/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Topiramato , Resultado do Tratamento
6.
Headache ; 45(10): 1304-12, 2005.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16324162

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of topiramate for the prevention of pediatric migraine with or without aura in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. BACKGROUND: Treatment options for pediatric migraine are currently limited, and no migraine preventive agents are approved for use in children in the United States. Topiramate is an effective migraine preventive therapy in adults, as demonstrated in several large, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-two children with migraine (age, 6 to 15 years) were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive topiramate (n = 112) or placebo (n = 50). This study was designed to ensure that 150 participants were randomized to study medication. An additional 12 qualified patients were randomized because they had successfully completed the screening phase. The double-blind phase of the trial consisted of a titration period and a maintenance period. Topiramate was initiated at 15 mg/day and titrated over 8 weeks to 2 to 3 mg/kg per day, or maximum tolerated dose, whichever was less (maximum allowed dose was 200 mg/day). The target dose was maintained for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the change in mean number of migraine days per month (28 days) during the double-blind phase relative to the 4-week prospective baseline phase for each treatment group. RESULTS: Topiramate treatment was associated with a mean reduction over the entire double-blind phase of 2.6 migraine days per month, compared with a mean reduction of 2.0 migraine days per month for placebo (P = .061 topiramate vs. placebo). A significantly greater percentage of topiramate patients (32%) experienced a > or = 75% reduction in mean monthly migraine days compared with placebo (14%, P = .02). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were low: 6.5% for the topiramate group and 4.0% for the placebo group. The adverse events that occurred most commonly in the topiramate group at an incidence rate greater than in the placebo group were: upper respiratory tract infection, anorexia, weight decrease, gastroenteritis, paresthesia, and somnolence. The mean average daily dose of topiramate during the maintenance period was 2.0 mg/kg per day. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that topiramate may be an effective migraine preventive therapy in children. Topiramate was well tolerated in this population. Further randomized studies would be required to definitively establish the efficacy of topiramate for pediatric migraine prevention.


Assuntos
Frutose/análogos & derivados , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/prevenção & controle , Fármacos Neuroprotetores/uso terapêutico , Adolescente , Criança , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Frutose/efeitos adversos , Frutose/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Enxaqueca com Aura/prevenção & controle , Enxaqueca sem Aura/prevenção & controle , Fármacos Neuroprotetores/efeitos adversos , Projetos Piloto , Topiramato
7.
Arthritis Rheum ; 53(4): 519-27, 2005 Aug 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16082646

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with moderate-to-severe fibromyalgia pain compared with the general population, and to assess the relationship between pain severity and HRQOL before and after treatment with an analgesic. METHODS: Data were obtained from a randomized, double-blind study of patients with moderate-to-severe fibromyalgia pain. Patients received either tramadol/acetaminophen or placebo 4 times/day as needed for 91 days. HRQOL was measured with the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ). Baseline HRQOL scores were compared with a national sample of noninstitutionalized adults and a sample of patients with impaired HRQOL due to congestive heart failure. Patients with fibromyalgia were divided into tertiles by change in pain severity, and SF-36 scores were compared across the tertiles. Mean changes in SF-36 and FIQ scores were compared between treatment groups. RESULTS: Patients with fibromyalgia scored lower than the US norm on all SF-36 scales (P < 0.0001) and lower than patients with congestive heart failure on most scales. More severe pain was associated with greater impairment of HRQOL compared with less severe pain (P < 0.0001). Patients in the highest tertile for improved pain severity had greater improvement in HRQOL scores than patients in the lower tertiles. Compared with patients who received placebo (n = 157), patients treated with tramadol/acetaminophen (n = 156) showed greater improvement on SF-36 physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, and physical summary scales, as well as FIQ scales for ability to do job, pain, and stiffness (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Moderate-to-severe fibromyalgia pain significantly impairs HRQOL, and effective pain relief in these patients significantly increases HRQOL.


Assuntos
Acetaminofen/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Fibromialgia/tratamento farmacológico , Fibromialgia/fisiopatologia , Dor/fisiopatologia , Qualidade de Vida , Tramadol/administração & dosagem , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade
8.
Headache ; 45(10): 1317-27, 2005.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16324164

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare tramadol/acetaminophen (APAP) and placebo for the management of acute migraine pain. BACKGROUND: Tramadol/APAP tablets reduced moderate-to-moderately severe acute pain in controlled studies of other painful conditions. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study enrolled adults with migraine pain as per International Headache Society criteria. Subjects took tramadol/APAP (total dose, 75 mg/650 mg) or placebo for a typical migraine with moderate-to-severe pain. Severity of pain and migraine-related symptoms were recorded before study medication and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 24 hours after study medication. RESULTS: Efficacy analyses included 305 subjects (154 tramadol/APAP and 151 placebo). Treatment response was higher for tramadol/APAP than a placebo at 2 hours after dosing (55.8% vs. 33.8%, P < .001) and at every other assessment from 30 minutes (12.3% vs. 6.6%) through 6 hours (64.9% vs. 37.7%) (all P< or = .022). Subjects in the tramadol/APAP group were more likely than those in the placebo group to be pain-free at 2 hours (22.1% vs. 9.3%), 6 hours (42.9% vs. 25.2%), and 24 hours (52.7% vs. 37.9%) (all P< or = .007). Two hours after dosing, moderate-to-severe symptoms that were less common for tramadol/APAP than placebo included photophobia (34.6% vs. 52.2%, P= .003) and phonophobia (34.3% vs. 44.9%, P = .008), but not migraine-related nausea (38.5% vs. 29.4%, P= .681). Treatment-related adverse events included nausea, dizziness, vomiting, and somnolence. CONCLUSIONS: Tramadol/APAP reduces the severity of pain, photophobia, and phonophobia associated with migraine headache, but does not reduce migraine-associated nausea. Tramadol/APAP might be an appropriate option for the management of moderate-to-severe migraine headache.


Assuntos
Acetaminofen/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/tratamento farmacológico , Tramadol/uso terapêutico , Acetaminofen/efeitos adversos , Doença Aguda , Adulto , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/efeitos adversos , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Tramadol/efeitos adversos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa