RESUMO
Background: Dyslipidemia is defined as the high-density lipoprotein and apolipoprotein A (apo A) levels <10th percentile and/or total cholesterol, triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), apolipoprotein B, or Lipoprotein (a) levels more than the 90th percentile. Aim and Objectives: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the fixed-dose combination of Atorvastatin and Ezetimibe with Atorvastatin monotherapy among patients with dyslipidemia. Materials and Methods: The present study was a randomized, double-blinded, prospective, and parallel-group study. Ninety-two outpatients of age in between 18 and 70 years from the Department of General Medicine who attended the hospital for the treatment of dyslipidemia were selected as study participants. Among 92 patients, 12 patients did not meet the study criteria. The remaining 80 patients were divided into two treatment groups at random and under double-blind conditions (39 in Group A and 41 in Group B). Each patient in both groups was followed for a period of 4 weeks after initiation of therapy. Total cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol levels were recorded at day 1, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks of therapy. Results: In this study, by the end of the study period (4 weeks), tablet Atorvastatin + tablet Ezetimibe combination therapy showed statistical significance difference in reducing mean total cholesterol and mean serum LDL levels in dyslipidemia cases than the group receiving Atorvastatin monotherapy. Conclusion: Atorvastatin in combination with Ezetimibe was more efficacious than Atorvastatin monotherapy in reducing total blood cholesterol and serum LDL levels. Atorvastatin plus Ezetimibe is equally safer as Atorvastatin monotherapy and well tolerated with fewer adverse effects.
RESUMO
Background: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy is defined as the presence of symptoms and signs of peripheral nerve damage among patients with diabetes, after ruling out other potential causes. Diabetic neuropathies are one among the most common long-term complications of diabetes. About 60% of diabetic patients are affected by neuropathy. Aim and Objectives: This study aims to study the efficacy and safety of tablet duloxetine 60 mg and tablet gabapentin 300 mg among patients with diabetic polyneuropathy. Materials and Methods: This study was randomized, comparative, double-blind parallel group study which was conducted for a period of 6 months. Sixty patients with diabetic polyneuropathic pain were randomly allocated into two groups. One group received duloxetine 60 mg and other group received gabapentin 300 mg. Efficacy was assessed using visual analog scale (VAS), short form of McGill pain questionnaire, and patients global impression of change score. Safety was assessed using adverse drug reaction profile. Results: In the duloxetine group, the mean VAS score at the baseline was 54.97 ± 6.75, and at 3 months, it was 20.07 ± 5.32 which was statistically significant. In the gabapentin group, the mean score at baseline was 53.57 ± 7.85, and at 3 months, it was 26.57 ± 4.39 which was also statistically significant. The difference between the baseline and 3rd month mean McGill score in both groups was statistically significant. Conclusions: We found that both duloxetine 60 mg once daily and gabapentin 300 mg once daily are effective in the treatment of diabetic polyneuropathic pain. However, duloxetine 60 mg once daily is more efficacious than gabapentin 300 mg once daily in the treatment of diabetic neuropathic pain. Both the drugs are well tolerated but gabapentin is better tolerated than duloxetine.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND Individuals working in the information technology (IT) industry are likely to develop lifestyle disorders. We aimed to determine the presence of defaecation-related disorders in IT personnel in Chennai. METHODS This cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was done from June to December 2018. We included employees between 18 and 60 years of age and excluded those with <1 year stay in Chennai, pregnancy and those who sent incomplete responses. The cohort was classified as normal, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), faecal evacuation disorder (FED) and a combination of the latter two. RESULTS The overall response rate was 95.6%. The study included 54.7% of men, and the median age was 31 years. The majority of respondents used an Indian toilet (554; 58%). Almost all (96.2%) passed stools daily, and stool consistency was soft in 59%. Based on the study criteria, 180 (18.8%) had FED, 56 (5.9%) had IBS and a small group had a combination of symptoms of IBS and FED (20; 2.1%). Respondents with symptoms of IBS had a higher proportion of comorbid states (p<0.0001), lesser stool frequency (p<0.0001) and required more toilet time (p<0.00001). CONCLUSION Over one-fourth (26.7%) of the respondents had defaecation-related issues, 18.8% had symptoms suggestive of FED and 5.6% that of IBS, often above 30 years of age.