An Open-Label, Randomized, Parallel-Group Study to Assess the Safety, Efficacy, and Tolerability of Tapentadol Versus Tramadol in Outpatients with Moderate to Severe Chronic Low Back Pain at a Tertiary Care Hospital in South India

Q3 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal Pub Date : 2023-06-30 DOI:10.13005/bpj/2685
S. Naveen, P. Elango, R. S
{"title":"An Open-Label, Randomized, Parallel-Group Study to Assess the Safety, Efficacy, and Tolerability of Tapentadol Versus Tramadol in Outpatients with Moderate to Severe Chronic Low Back Pain at a Tertiary Care Hospital in South India","authors":"S. Naveen, P. Elango, R. S","doi":"10.13005/bpj/2685","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Low back pain is a very common musculoskeletal symptom with multifactorial aetiology. Aims and objectives: Our study aimed at comparing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of tapentadol versus tramadol in out-patients with moderate to severe chronic low back pain. Fifty-two patients with a diagnosis of chronic low back pain for > 3 months were randomly assigned to receive either a 50 mg tablet of tapentadol (twice daily) or 50 mg tablet of tramadol (twice daily) for 1 week. The mean (±SD) difference in the reduction of pain (at end of 1 week) between the two groups was compared employing an independent student t-test for difference in mean values separately for the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) scores. The frequency of the different adverse events between the two groups was compared employing Chi-square test. Except for VAS scores, the baseline demographic parameters of the two groups were comparable. The study found that tapentadol reduced VAS and RMDQ scores more than tramadol (statistically significant p<0.001) between baseline and the end of week 1. Regarding safety and tolerability, the tapentadol group experienced nausea/vomiting and dizziness/somnolence more frequently than the tramadol group, with p-values of 0.011 and 0.001 respectively. Both groups experienced similar rates of headache and constipation, with p-values of 0.668 and 0.610, respectively. When compared to tramadol (50 mg twice daily), tapentadol (50mg twice daily) was found to significantly improve pain and disability in patients with moderate to severe chronic low back pain, while tapentadol had greater frequencies of side effects like nausea, vomiting, dizziness, and somnolence.","PeriodicalId":9054,"journal":{"name":"Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13005/bpj/2685","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Low back pain is a very common musculoskeletal symptom with multifactorial aetiology. Aims and objectives: Our study aimed at comparing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of tapentadol versus tramadol in out-patients with moderate to severe chronic low back pain. Fifty-two patients with a diagnosis of chronic low back pain for > 3 months were randomly assigned to receive either a 50 mg tablet of tapentadol (twice daily) or 50 mg tablet of tramadol (twice daily) for 1 week. The mean (±SD) difference in the reduction of pain (at end of 1 week) between the two groups was compared employing an independent student t-test for difference in mean values separately for the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) scores. The frequency of the different adverse events between the two groups was compared employing Chi-square test. Except for VAS scores, the baseline demographic parameters of the two groups were comparable. The study found that tapentadol reduced VAS and RMDQ scores more than tramadol (statistically significant p<0.001) between baseline and the end of week 1. Regarding safety and tolerability, the tapentadol group experienced nausea/vomiting and dizziness/somnolence more frequently than the tramadol group, with p-values of 0.011 and 0.001 respectively. Both groups experienced similar rates of headache and constipation, with p-values of 0.668 and 0.610, respectively. When compared to tramadol (50 mg twice daily), tapentadol (50mg twice daily) was found to significantly improve pain and disability in patients with moderate to severe chronic low back pain, while tapentadol had greater frequencies of side effects like nausea, vomiting, dizziness, and somnolence.
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
一项开放标签、随机、平行组研究,评估他他多与曲马多在印度南部一家三级医院治疗中重度慢性腰痛门诊患者中的安全性、有效性和耐受性
腰痛是一种非常常见的肌肉骨骼症状,具有多因素的病因。目的和目的:本研究旨在比较他他多与曲马多治疗中重度慢性腰痛门诊患者的疗效、安全性和耐受性。52例诊断为慢性腰痛> 3个月的患者被随机分配接受50毫克的他他多片(每日2次)或50毫克的曲马多片(每日2次),持续1周。采用独立学生t检验分别比较视觉模拟量表(VAS)和罗兰莫里斯残疾问卷(RMDQ)评分的平均值差异,比较两组(1周结束时)疼痛减轻的平均值(±SD)差异。采用卡方检验比较两组患者不同不良事件发生频率。除VAS评分外,两组的基线人口统计学参数具有可比性。研究发现,从基线到第1周末,他他多对VAS和RMDQ评分的降低高于曲马多(p<0.001)。在安全性和耐受性方面,他他多组出现恶心/呕吐和头晕/嗜睡的频率高于曲马多组,p值分别为0.011和0.001。两组的头痛和便秘发生率相似,p值分别为0.668和0.610。与曲马多(50mg,每日两次)相比,他他多(50mg,每日两次)可以显著改善中度至重度慢性腰痛患者的疼痛和残疾,但他他多有更频繁的副作用,如恶心、呕吐、头晕和嗜睡。
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
Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal
Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
189
期刊介绍: Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal (BPJ) is an International Peer Reviewed Research Journal in English language whose frequency is quarterly. The journal seeks to promote research, exchange of scientific information, consideration of regulatory mechanisms that affect drug development and utilization, and medical education. BPJ take much care in making your article published without much delay with your kind cooperation and support. Research papers, review articles, short communications, news are welcomed provided they demonstrate new findings of relevance to the field as a whole. All articles will be peer-reviewed and will find a place in Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal based on the merit and innovativeness of the research work. BPJ hopes that Researchers, Research scholars, Academician, Industrialists etc. would make use of this journal for the development of science and technology. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: Biochemistry Genetics Microbiology and virology Molecular, cellular and cancer biology Neurosciences Pharmacology Drug Discovery Cardiovascular Pharmacology Neuropharmacology Molecular & Cellular Mechanisms Immunology & Inflammation Pharmacy.
期刊最新文献
A Comparison of the Recovery Profile of Dexmedetomidine When Administered by Different Routes in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy – A Randomized Controlled Trial Health Literacy in People Living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection: A Narrative Review Targeted Pharmaceutical Analysis of Antibiotic Use by Risk Criteria in Patients Hospitalized in the Infectious and Tropical Diseases Department at Treichville Teaching Hospital (Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire) Hybrid Model: Deep Learning method for Early Detection of Alzheimer’s disease from MRI images Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma: A Potential Therapy to Mitigate Severe Covid-19 Manifestations
×
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