Conventional and sustained-release valproate in children with newly diagnosed epilepsy: a randomized and crossover study comparing clinical effects, patient preference and pharmacokinetics

2006 ◽  
Vol 62 (10) ◽  
pp. 805-815 ◽  
Author(s):  
José L. Herranz ◽  
Rosa Arteaga ◽  
Javier Adín ◽  
Juan A. Armijo
Keyword(s):  
Sustained Release ◽  
Crossover Study ◽  
Patient Preference ◽  
Clinical Effects ◽  
Newly Diagnosed

scholarly journals A prospective randomized comparative study of the efficacy of sustained release vaginal insert versus intracervical gel in primigravidae at term pregnancy

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1532
Author(s):  
Thejaswi R. Thupakula ◽  
Bela Makhija ◽  
Arpana Haritwal
Keyword(s):  
Sustained Release ◽  
Dropout Rate ◽  
Cold Chain ◽  
Clinical Effects ◽  
Term Pregnancy ◽  
Duration Of Action ◽  
Successful Induction ◽  
Group A ◽  
Consecutive Term ◽  
Group B

vBackground: Induction of labour is the intentional initiation of labour before spontaneous onset for the purpose of delivery of fetoplacental unit. Failure of induction is responsible for increased incidence of caesarean delivery. This study performed to assess and compare the clinical effects of sustained release vaginal insert versus intracervical gel in primiparous women with term pregnancy in terms of improvement of Bishop’s score, Induction delivery interval, incidence of hyperstimulation, maternal and neonatal outcomes.Methods: A total 100 consecutive term pregnant women who underwent labor induction for fetal or maternal indications were divided randomly into two groups. Group A - sustained release Vaginal insert and Group B - Intracervical gel. Informed consent was taken from each patient.Results: Statistically significant increase in final Bishop’s score (p=0.008) and hyperstimulation (p=0.04) was seen in Vaginal insert group as compared to Intracervical gel group, while there were no statistically significant differences in maternal outcomes, neonatal outcomes and need for oxytocin augmentation in both groups.Conclusions: In this study we found that insert did not improve the induction delivery interval or rate of successful induction, nor did it have any advantage in terms of neonatal outcome although it did improve the Bishops score – Its advantage was in terms of single application, few prevaginal examinations, longer duration of action and immediate retrieval in case of hyperstimulation. Its main drawback remained the maintenance of cold chain without which its efficacy decreases. Another significant observation was the dropout rate of insert (16%).

Preference for Rizatriptan 10-mg Wafer vs. Eletriptan 40-mg Tablet for Acute Treatment of Migraine

Cephalalgia ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 246-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
MJA Láinez ◽  
S Evers ◽  
E Kinge ◽  
G Allais ◽  
C Allen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Crossover Study ◽  
Patient Preference ◽  
Acute Treatment ◽  
Common Reason ◽  
Study Medication ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Alternate Therapy ◽  
Headache Relief

Preference is a composite, patient-oriented endpoint incorporating efficacy, tolerability, formulation, and convenience of medications. The objective of this study was to compare patient preference for rizatriptan 10-mg wafer vs. eletriptan 40-mg tablet for acute treatment of migraine. In this multicentre, open-label, two-period, crossover study, out-patients were randomly assigned to treat the first of two moderate to severe migraines with rizatriptan or eletriptan and the second with the alternate therapy. Patients completed diary assessments at baseline and up to 24 h after taking study medication. At the last visit, patients completed a psychometrically validated preference questionnaire. A total of 372 patients (mean age 38 years, 85% female) treated two migraine attacks, and 342 patients (92%) expressed a preference for treatment. Significantly more ( P ≤ 0.001) patients preferred rizatriptan 10-mg wafer [61.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 55.7, 66.3] to eletriptan 40-mg tablet (38.9%; 95% CI 33.7, 44.3). The most common reason given for preference of either treatment was speed of headache relief. At 2 h, 80% and 69% of patients reported that rizatriptan and eletriptan, respectively, was convenient or very convenient to take (mean convenience score 1.99 vs. 2.31, respectively; P ≤ 0.001). Both triptans were well tolerated. In this head-to-head study designed to evaluate global patient preference, significantly more patients preferred the rizatriptan 10-mg wafer to the eletriptan 40-mg tablet for acute treatment of migraine. The single most important reason for preference was speed of relief, consistent with results from previous preference studies.

A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Crossover Study to Evaluate Patient Preference between Tadalafil and Sildenafil

2004 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 499-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander von Keitz ◽  
Jacob Rajfer ◽  
Scott Segal ◽  
Aileen Murphy ◽  
Jonathan Denne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crossover Study ◽  
Patient Preference ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blind Crossover Study ◽  
Double Blind Crossover Study

Randomized, crossover study evaluating patient preference and the impact on quality of life of urisheaths vs absorbent products in incontinent men

2010 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Chartier-Kastler ◽  
Philippe Ballanger ◽  
Jacques Petit ◽  
Marc Fourmarier ◽  
Stéphane Bart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Crossover Study ◽  
Patient Preference ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Randomized Crossover Study
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document