Piroxicam and paracetamol in the prevention of early recurrent pain and emergency department readmission after renal colic: Randomized placebo-controlled trial.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Academic Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-08-19 DOI:10.1111/acem.14996
Rahma Jaballah, Marwa Toumia, Rym Youssef, Khaoula Bel Haj Ali, Arij Bakir, Sarra Sassi, Hajer Yaakoubi, Cyrine Kouraichi, Randa Dhaoui, Adel Sekma, Asma Zorgati, Kaouthar Beltaief, Zied Mezgar, Mariem Khrouf, Wahid Bouida, Mohamed Habib Grissa, Jamel Saad, Hamdi Boubaker, Riadh Boukef, Mohamed Amine Msolli, Semir Nouira
{"title":"Piroxicam and paracetamol in the prevention of early recurrent pain and emergency department readmission after renal colic: Randomized placebo-controlled trial.","authors":"Rahma Jaballah, Marwa Toumia, Rym Youssef, Khaoula Bel Haj Ali, Arij Bakir, Sarra Sassi, Hajer Yaakoubi, Cyrine Kouraichi, Randa Dhaoui, Adel Sekma, Asma Zorgati, Kaouthar Beltaief, Zied Mezgar, Mariem Khrouf, Wahid Bouida, Mohamed Habib Grissa, Jamel Saad, Hamdi Boubaker, Riadh Boukef, Mohamed Amine Msolli, Semir Nouira","doi":"10.1111/acem.14996","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Renal colic (RC) is a common urologic emergency often leading to significant pain and recurrent hospital visits. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of piroxicam versus paracetamol in preventing pain recurrence and hospital readmission in patients treated for RC and discharged from the emergency department (ED).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective, randomized, single-blind trial was conducted in four EDs. Eligible adults with RC were randomized to receive oral piroxicam, paracetamol, or placebo for 5 days post-ED discharge. Primary outcomes included pain recurrence and ED readmission within 7 days. Secondary outcomes included time to recurrence and treatment-related side effects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1383 enrolled patients, no significant differences were observed among the groups regarding baseline characteristics. Pain recurrence rates within 7 days were 29% (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.9%-33.2%) for piroxicam, 30.3% (95% CI 26.1%-34.5%) for paracetamol, and 30.8% (95% CI 26.6%-35.0%) for placebo, with no significant between-group differences (p = 0.84). Among patients experiencing recurrence, the majority encounter it within the initial 2 days following their discharge (86% in the piroxicam group, 84.1% in the paracetamol group, and 86% in the placebo group, respectively). ED readmission rates were similar across groups: 20.8% (95% CI 17.1%-24.5%) in the piroxicam group, 23.8% (95% CI 19.9%-27.7%) in the paracetamol group, and 22.9% (95% CI 19.1%-26.8%) in the placebo group (p = 0.52). The piroxicam group reported significantly higher adverse effects compared to others.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Piroxicam and paracetamol did not demonstrate efficacy in preventing pain recurrence or ED readmission within the first week following RC treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":7105,"journal":{"name":"Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.14996","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Renal colic (RC) is a common urologic emergency often leading to significant pain and recurrent hospital visits. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of piroxicam versus paracetamol in preventing pain recurrence and hospital readmission in patients treated for RC and discharged from the emergency department (ED).

Methods: A prospective, randomized, single-blind trial was conducted in four EDs. Eligible adults with RC were randomized to receive oral piroxicam, paracetamol, or placebo for 5 days post-ED discharge. Primary outcomes included pain recurrence and ED readmission within 7 days. Secondary outcomes included time to recurrence and treatment-related side effects.

Results: Of 1383 enrolled patients, no significant differences were observed among the groups regarding baseline characteristics. Pain recurrence rates within 7 days were 29% (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.9%-33.2%) for piroxicam, 30.3% (95% CI 26.1%-34.5%) for paracetamol, and 30.8% (95% CI 26.6%-35.0%) for placebo, with no significant between-group differences (p = 0.84). Among patients experiencing recurrence, the majority encounter it within the initial 2 days following their discharge (86% in the piroxicam group, 84.1% in the paracetamol group, and 86% in the placebo group, respectively). ED readmission rates were similar across groups: 20.8% (95% CI 17.1%-24.5%) in the piroxicam group, 23.8% (95% CI 19.9%-27.7%) in the paracetamol group, and 22.9% (95% CI 19.1%-26.8%) in the placebo group (p = 0.52). The piroxicam group reported significantly higher adverse effects compared to others.

Conclusions: Piroxicam and paracetamol did not demonstrate efficacy in preventing pain recurrence or ED readmission within the first week following RC treatment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
吡罗昔康和扑热息痛用于预防肾绞痛后的早期复发性疼痛和急诊科再入院:随机安慰剂对照试验。
目的:肾绞痛(Renal colic,RC)是一种常见的泌尿科急症,通常会导致明显的疼痛和反复住院。本研究旨在比较吡罗昔康和扑热息痛在防止急诊科(ED)出院的肾绞痛患者疼痛复发和再次入院方面的有效性和安全性:在四家急诊室开展了一项前瞻性、随机、单盲试验。符合条件的成人 RC 患者在急诊科出院后 5 天内随机接受吡罗昔康、扑热息痛或安慰剂口服治疗。主要结果包括疼痛复发和急诊室 7 天内再次入院。次要结果包括复发时间和治疗相关副作用:结果:在 1383 名入选患者中,各组患者的基线特征无明显差异。吡罗昔康的 7 天内疼痛复发率为 29%(95% 置信区间 [CI] 24.9%-33.2%),扑热息痛为 30.3%(95% 置信区间 [CI] 26.1%-34.5%),安慰剂为 30.8%(95% 置信区间 [CI] 26.6%-35.0%),组间差异不显著(P = 0.84)。在复发的患者中,大多数是在出院后的最初两天内复发的(吡罗昔康组、扑热息痛组和安慰剂组的复发率分别为86%、84.1%和86%)。各组的急诊室再入院率相似:吡罗昔康组为 20.8%(95% CI 17.1%-24.5%),扑热息痛组为 23.8%(95% CI 19.9%-27.7%),安慰剂组为 22.9%(95% CI 19.1%-26.8%)(P = 0.52)。吡罗昔康组报告的不良反应明显高于其他组:结论:吡罗昔康和扑热息痛对预防RC治疗后第一周内疼痛复发或急诊室再入院没有效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Academic Emergency Medicine
Academic Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.80%
发文量
207
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) is the official monthly publication of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) and publishes information relevant to the practice, educational advancements, and investigation of emergency medicine. It is the second-largest peer-reviewed scientific journal in the specialty of emergency medicine. The goal of AEM is to advance the science, education, and clinical practice of emergency medicine, to serve as a voice for the academic emergency medicine community, and to promote SAEM''s goals and objectives. Members and non-members worldwide depend on this journal for translational medicine relevant to emergency medicine, as well as for clinical news, case studies and more. Each issue contains information relevant to the research, educational advancements, and practice in emergency medicine. Subject matter is diverse, including preclinical studies, clinical topics, health policy, and educational methods. The research of SAEM members contributes significantly to the scientific content and development of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Facilitators to implementing preventive health interventions for adolescents in the emergency department: A multicenter qualitative analysis. Risk-stratification tools for emergency department patients with syncope: A systematic review and meta-analysis of direct evidence for SAEM GRACE. Implications of inadequate communication: Emergency care for deaf and hard-of-hearing patients. Failure rate of D-dimer testing in patients with high clinical probability of pulmonary embolism: Ancillary analysis of three European studies. Miles to go before we sleep: Does increasing abdominal computed tomography utilization really improve patient-oriented outcomes?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1