Pain control with paracetamol from a sustained release formulation and a standard release formulation after third molar surgery: a randomised controlled trial

被引:15
作者
Coulthard, P
Hill, CM
Frame, JW
Barry, H
Ridge, BD
Bacon, TH
机构
[1] Univ Manchester, Dent Hosp, Manchester M15 6FH, Lancs, England
[2] Univ Dent Hosp Cardiff, Cardiff, S Glam, Wales
[3] Univ Birmingham, Sch Dent, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[4] Dublin Dent Hosp, Dublin, Ireland
[5] GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Res & Dev, Weybridge, Surrey, England
关键词
D O I
10.1038/sj.bdj.4801174a
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective To compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of a sustained release (SR) paracetamol formulation (Panadol Extend) with a standard immediate release (IR) formulation (Panadol) after third molar surgery. Design A multi-centre, double-blind, randomised clinical trial. Methods Patients received either a single oral dose of SR paracetamol or IR paracetamol for pain after the removal of at least one impacted third molar requiring bone removal under general anaesthesia. Post-operative pain and pain relief assessments were undertaken at time intervals up to 8 hours. Global assessments of effectiveness were made at 4 and 8 hours. Any adverse events were also recorded. Results Of 627 randomised patients, 314 were treated with SR paracetamol and 313 with IR paracetamol. In the per protocol population at 4 hours, 35.1% of the 252 patients on SR paracetamol rated the study medication as very good or excellent compared with 27.7% of the 258 patients on IR paracetamol. There were few statistically significant differences among the secondary parameters but where they did occur they favoured SR paracetamol. Trends in favour of SR paracetamol were observed among the secondary parameters and these tended to emerge at the later time points. For example, while there was no statistically significant difference in time to re-medication between the treatment groups, the estimated time to re-medication was longer for patients treated with SR paracetamol (4 hr 5 min) compared with IR paracetamol (3 hr 10 min). The high rate of re-medication observed is consistent with that reported for IR paracetamol using the post-operative dental pain model(4,6). No difference was observed between the SR paracetamol and IR paracetamol treatment groups in distribution, incidence or severity of adverse events, Conclusions SR paracetamol and IR paracetamol are clinically and statistically equivalent. While SR paracetamol and IR paracetamol were similar in terms of both onset of analgesia and peak analgesic effect, SR paracetamol had a longer duration of activity than IR paracetamol. The safety profiles of SR paracetamol and IR paracetamol were found to be very similar.
引用
收藏
页码:319 / 324
页数:6
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1991, ADV PAIN RES THER
[2]   THE ADDITIVE ANALGESIC EFFICACY OF ACETAMINOPHEN, 1000 MG, AND CODEINE, 60 MG, IN DENTAL PAIN [J].
BENTLEY, KC ;
HEAD, TW .
CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 1987, 42 (06) :634-640
[3]  
*BRIT MED ASS, 2000, BRIT NAT FORUM, V39, P205
[4]   The visual analogue pain intensity scale: what is moderate pain in millimetres? [J].
Collins, SL ;
Moore, RA ;
McQuay, HJ .
PAIN, 1997, 72 (1-2) :95-97
[5]   IBUPROFEN AND ACETAMINOPHEN IN THE RELIEF OF ACUTE PAIN - A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED STUDY [J].
COOPER, SA ;
SCHACHTEL, BP ;
GOLDMAN, E ;
GELB, S ;
COHN, P .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 1989, 29 (11) :1026-1030
[6]   MODELS FOR CLINICAL-ASSESSMENT OF ORAL ANALGESICS [J].
COOPER, SA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1983, 75 (5A) :24-29
[7]  
DOLLERY CT, 1999, THERAPEUTIC DRUGS, V2, pM132
[8]  
KIERSCH TA, 1994, CLIN THER, V16, P394
[9]  
McQuay H, 1998, EVIDENCE BASED RESOU, P187
[10]   MULTICENTER CLINICAL-TRIAL OF IBUPROFEN AND ACETAMINOPHEN IN THE TREATMENT OF POSTOPERATIVE DENTAL PAIN [J].
MEHLISCH, DR ;
SOLLECITO, WA ;
HELFRICK, JF ;
LEIBOLD, DG ;
MARKOWITZ, R ;
SCHOW, CE ;
SHULTZ, R ;
WAITE, DE .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION, 1990, 121 (02) :257-263