ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a debilitating affliction that affects diverse quality of life (QoL) parameters such as sleep, self-esteem, and daily activities. Second-generation antihistamines, such as desloratadine, are more effective and safer in managing CSU. Desloratadine is a nonsedating, potent, and highly selective H1 receptor antagonist. At its daily dose of 5 mg, almost half of CSU patients do not show symptomatic improvement. European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)/Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA2LEN)/European Dermatology Forum (EDF) (EuroGuiDerm)/Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology (APAAACI) guidelines recommend increasing the dosage to up to four times in such nonresponsive patients. However, there is insufficient clinical evidence in Indian settings. METHOD: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of 10 mg desloratadine (OD) in 256 nonresponsive patients with moderate to severe CSU. The primary outcome was the change in Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7) from baseline to four weeks. Additionally, change in Chronic Urticaria Quality of Life (CU-Q2oL) scores during the course of treatment was also evaluated. RESULT: The mean UAS7 scores showed a significant reduction from 31.9 ± 4.8 at baseline to 18.2 ± 8.1 at the end of the study (p < 0.0001). The use of a higher dose of desloratadine also decreased the CU-Q2oL scores significantly from 59.8 ± 14.7 at baseline to 35.4 ± 10 at four weeks (p < 0.0001). The incidence of adverse events (AEs) possibly linked to the drug was low (1.6%), and no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Results indicated improvements in the disease severity as well as its positive impact on participants' QoL. This study confirms the efficacy and safety of daily use of a twofold dose of desloratadine in nonresponsive moderate to severe CSU patients.
ABSTRACT
Objective. Understanding factors while selecting an analgesic and its usage pattern by Indian healthcare practitioners (HCPs). Methods. Questionnaire-based survey was conducted among six healthcare specialties. Results. Total 448 HCPs participated. Patient's age (72.8%, 74.4%, 87.5%, and 78.9%) and duration of therapy (70.8%, 66.2%, 69.6%, and 73.6%) were main attributes for selecting an opioid according to general practitioners (GPs), dentists, consulting physicians (CPs), and surgeons, respectively. Patient's age was important factor while selecting NSAID according to 77.60%, 66.91%, and 84.20% of GPs, dentists, surgeons, respectively. For mild pain, paracetamol was the choice according to 77%, 78.57% and 74% of GPs, CPs, and surgeons, respectively. For moderate pain, 77%, 87.50%, 68%, and 80.30% of GPs, CPs, surgeons and orthopedicians, respectively, preferred the use of paracetamol + tramadol combination. For moderate pain, NSAID + paracetamol and paracetamol+diclofenac were used by 68.94% and 47.73% of orthopedicians, respectively. Lack of pain clinic (38.8%) in city was commonly cited reason for not referring patients to pain clinics. Conclusion. Patient's age, duration of therapy, comorbid conditions, frequency of dosing, and severity of pain are important parameters while selecting analgesics. Paracetamol and its combinations are commonly used for mild and moderate pain, respectively. Pain clinics currently have limited presence in India.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of tramadol and diclofenac versus a standard approved FDC of tramadol and paracetamol, in patients with acute moderate to severe pain. METHODS: A total of 204 patients with moderate to severe pain due to acute musculoskeletal conditions (n=52), acute flare of osteoarthritis (n=52), acute flare of rheumatoid arthritis (n=50), or postoperative pain (n=50) were enrolled in the study at baseline. Each disease category was then randomized to receive either of two treatments for 5 days: group A received an FDC of immediate-release tramadol hydrochloride (50 mg) and sustained-release diclofenac sodium (75 mg) (one tablet, twice daily), and group B received an FDC of tramadol hydrochloride (37.5 mg) and paracetamol (325 mg) (two tablets every 4-6 hours, up to a maximum of eight tablets daily). The primary efficacy end points were reductions in pain intensity from baseline at day 3 and day 5 as assessed by a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score. RESULTS: Group A showed a significant reduction in the VAS score for overall pain from baseline on day 3 (P=0.001) and day 5 (P<0.0001) as compared with group B. The combination of tramadol-diclofenac resulted in few mild to moderate adverse events (nausea, vomiting, epigastric pain, and gastritis), which required minimal management, without any treatment discontinuation. The number of adverse events in group A was nine (8.82%) compared with 22 (21.78%) in group B, after 5 days of treatment. CONCLUSION: An FDC of tramadol-diclofenac showed a significantly greater reduction in pain intensity and was well tolerated compared with tramadol-paracetamol, resulting in better analgesia in patients suffering from moderate to severe pain due to acute musculoskeletal conditions, postoperative pain following orthopedic surgery, or acute flare of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.
