Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Journal of Forensic Medicine ; (6): 282-285, 2009.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-983489

ABSTRACT

Amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) is the most widespread narcotics in the 21st century. The methamphetamine's intoxication mechanism, psychological dependence, drug resistance and therapeutic drug development are the hot spots in current research. Establishment of animal model with methamphetamine poisoning is the basic for the relative studies, the normalization and standardization of the animal model settles the foundation for methamphetamine's further research. This article reviews the animal model of methamphetamine poisoning in China and abroad, the brief history of the acute, subacute and chronic animal model of methamphetamine poisoning, as well as the principles and methods of the animal model establishment and its evaluation criteria. The necessity, significance and its scientific expansion of performing experimental research on the methamphetamine poisoning animal model are also discussed.


Subject(s)
Animals , Humans , Amphetamine-Related Disorders/psychology , Behavior, Animal/drug effects , Central Nervous System Stimulants/poisoning , Cerebral Cortex/drug effects , Disease Models, Animal , Forensic Toxicology , Injections, Intraperitoneal , Methamphetamine/poisoning , Stereotyped Behavior/drug effects
2.
Article in English | IMSEAR | ID: sea-42918

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of olanzapines and haloperidol in treating patients with amphetamine psychosis. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Fifty-eight patients experiencing episode of amphetamine psychosis were randomly assigned to olanzapine (N=29) or haloperidol (N=29) in 1:1 (olanzapine: haloperidol) ratio. All patients started with 5-10 mg/day of the study drug; after each 7-day period, the study drug could be adjusted in 5-mg increments or decrements within the allowed dose range of 5-20 mg/day during the 4-week double-blind period. RESULTS: Clinical response was seen in both treatment groups since the first week. Ninety three percent of the olanzapine patients (N=27 of 29) and 79.3% of the haloperidol patients (N=23 of 27) were clinically improved at endpoint. These differences were not statistically significant (p=0.25). The Simpson-Angus total score change from baseline to endpoint reflected no extrapyramidal symptoms among the olanzapine-treated patients (median=0.0, range=0.0). In contrast, worsening occurred among the haloperidol-treated patients (median=0.2, range=0.0-3.1). The differences of mean change in Simpson Angus Scale significantly favored olanzapine (p<0.01). Change to endpoint on the Barnes Akathisia Scale showed that olanzapine-treated patients' scores were close to the baseline (median=0.0, range=-1.0-0.0), whereas haloperidol-treated patients' scores worsened from the baseline (median=0.0, range=-1.0-3.0). This difference was statistically significant (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Both olanzapine and haloperidol were efficacious in the treatment of patients with amphetamine psychosis. Olanzapine was superior to conventional neuroleptic haloperidol in treatment safety with lower frequency and severity of extrapyramidal symptoms.


Subject(s)
Adult , Amphetamine-Related Disorders/psychology , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Benzodiazepines/therapeutic use , Double-Blind Method , Female , Haloperidol/therapeutic use , Humans , Male , Psychoses, Substance-Induced/drug therapy , Treatment Outcome
3.
São Paulo; Nova Cultural; 1988. 72 p. ilus, tab.
Monography in Portuguese | LILACS, AHM-Acervo, CAMPOLIMPO-Acervo | ID: lil-646154
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL