scholarly journals Effect of Ginger-Naproxen on Knee Osteoarthritis: A Clinical Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (01) ◽  
pp. 17-21
Author(s):  
Mehtab Munir ◽  
Khalid Mustafa Memon ◽  
Sajid Abbas Jaffri ◽  
Hasan Ali
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
P Value ◽  
Medicine Department ◽  
National Medical ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Naproxen 500Mg

Objective: To evaluate clinical efficacy and safety of ginger with naproxen, in treating knee osteoarthritis. Study design and setting: Randomized clinical trial conducted in medicine department OPD of National Medical Center, Karachi from 21st September 2018 till 31st March 2019. Methodology: This study was conducted on 60 patients of knee osteoarthritis. After written informed consent, the patients were randomized to two groups. Group A received tablet naproxen 500mg and capsule ginger 550mg, twice daily and group B was given tablet naproxen 500mg twice daily. Total 53 patients finished the study (group A: n=27 and group B: n=26). Baseline pain (Visual Analogue Scale) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) scores were noted at the beginning of study and reassessed after 6 weeks of the intervention. Safety profile of the drugs was assessed by observing adverse effects. Independent t-test was applied to check difference between the two groups. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 23.0. P-value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: Before the intervention no significant difference was observed in two groups. However significant difference was observed between the groups in pain (p=0.019) and WOMAC (p=0.020) scores after 6 weeks of intervention. Moreover there was no significant difference (p=0.914) in occurrence of adverse effects between the two groups at the end of 6 weeks of study. Conclusion: Ginger with naproxen can effectively treat pain and stiffness in knee osteoarthritis without added adverse effects when compared with naproxen alone.

scholarly journals Comparison Of Diacerein-Ginger With Diacerein Alone In Treating Knee Osteoarthritis

2019 ◽  
Vol 09 (04) ◽  
pp. 308-311
Author(s):  
Mehtab Munir ◽  
Shahid Mustafa Memon ◽  
Sajid Abbas Jaffri ◽  
Khalid Mustafa Memon
Keyword(s):  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
P Value ◽  
Womac Pain ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Insignificant Difference ◽  
Group B ◽  
Pain At Rest

Objective: To compare clinical efficacy of diacerein-ginger with diacerein alone in treating knee osteoarthritis. Duration and place of study: It was a randomized clinical trial conducted from 21st September 2018 to 31stMarch 2019, in medical OPD of a private hospital in Karachi. Methodology: 60 diagnosed patients of knee osteoarthritis were included in this study. Male and female patients 50 years of age, fulfilling the inclusion criteria and after written informed consent experienced a wash-out period of 72 hours. These patients were systematically randomized into 2 groups each having 30 members. Group A received capsule Diacerein 50mg + capsule Ginger 550 mg twice daily and group B received capsule Diacerein 50mg twice daily, for 12 weeks. Parameters checked at 0, 6 and 12 weeks were: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index, pain at rest and movement (Visual Analogue Scale). Comparison of the two groups was done by independent t-test. Results: Among 60 patients; 20 (33.33 %) were males and 40 (66.66%) were females. 4 patients in group A and 4 in B, dropped out during the study. Comparison of group A with group B in WOMAC and pain (at rest and movement) scores showed insignificant difference at day 0 before prescription of the drugs. However comparison showed highly significant difference (P-value < 0.001) between the two groups in WOMAC, pain at rest and movement scores at the end of 6th and 12th weeks of intervention. Conclusion: Diacerein-Ginger is clinically more efficacious for management of knee OA than Diacerein alone

Comparative Study to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety for Management of Neuropathic Pain with Gabapentin, Pregabalin, and Amitriptyline

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (9) ◽  
pp. 2995-2998
Author(s):  
Abdulrahman Alharbi
Keyword(s):  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
P Value ◽  
Lumbosacral Spine ◽  
X Rays ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Background: Current treatments for neuropathic pain (NeP) are tricyclic antidepressants (TCA), such as pregabalin and gabapentin are first-line drugs for the management of NeP complaints. Current treatment for the management of neuropathic pain is often sub-standard. Methods: It's a three-arm, prospective, comparative, open-label study. A total of 270 patients with persistent lumbar radiculopathy were randomized into three groups based on clinical examination, symptoms, X-rays, and MRI scans of the lumbosacral spine. Patients in Groups A and B got Gabapentine 300 mg, Pregabaline 75 mg, and Amitriptyline 75 mg, respectively. Results: The mean NPRS score at two months was 3.72 ± 2.65 for Group A, 3.63 ± 2.65 for Group B, and 5.21 ± 2.65 for Group C. The F-value was 6.63, and the p-value was 0.001, which was statistically significant. As compared to the other two treatment groups, the subjects in Group 3 saw a significant difference. ‎ The adverse effects reported occurrence of dizziness was significantly more in group B with 21 patients (23.33%) as compared to group A with 11 patients (12.22%) and group C with 4 patients (4.44%), [p=0.041). The sedation occurred in 28 patients of group B (31.11%), which was significantly more than group A i,e, in 23 patients (25.55%) and group C, i.e., 22 patients (24.44%), [P=0.036]. Conclusions: In patients with NeP Thus, in conclusion, three groups Gabapentine, Pregabaline, and Amitriptyline, are equally efficacious in relieving pain in NeP. Pregabalin has advantages in terms of Numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) score over the Gabapentine and Amitriptyline. Gabapentine has fewer reported adverse effects and hence better patient compliance on long-term use. Keywords: Gabapentine, Amitriptyline, Pregabalin, Neuropathic pain

scholarly journals Comparison between scalpel incision and electrocautery incision in midline abdominal surgery: a comparative study

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 1507
Author(s):  
Amit Yadav ◽  
Lakshman Agarwal ◽  
Sumit A. Jain ◽  
Sanjay Kumawat ◽  
Sandeep Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Abdominal Surgery ◽  
Wound Infection ◽  
Skin Incision ◽  
P Value ◽  
Wound Area ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Background: Fear of poor wound healing have curtailed the use of diathermy for making skin incision. Scalpel produces little damage to surrounding tissue but causing more blood loss. Our aim of study was to compare electrocautery incision with scalpel incision in terms of incision time, blood loss, postoperative pain and wound infection.Methods: Total of 104 patients were included in the study undergoing midline abdominal surgery. Patients were randomized into electrocautery (group A) and scalpel (group B). The incision dimension, incision time and blood loss were noted intraoperatively. Postoperative pain was noted on postoperative day 2 using visual analog scale. Wound complications were recorded on every postoperative day till the patient was discharged.Results: 52 patients in each of the two groups were analyzed. There was significant difference found between group A and group B in terms of mean incision time per unit wound area, 8.16±1.59 s\cm2 and 11.02±1.72 s\cm2 respectively (p value=0.0001). The mean blood loss per unit wound area was found to be significantly lower in group A (0.31±0.04 ml\cm2) as compared to group B (1.21±0.21), p value=0.0001. There was no significant difference noted in terms of postoperative pain and wound infection between both groups.Conclusions: Electrocautery can be considered safe in making skin incision in midline laparotomy compared to scalpel incision with comparable postoperative pain and wound infection with less intraoperative blood loss and less time consuming.

scholarly journals Comparison of Recovery Time of Propofol and Midazolam with Propofol Alone for Sedation in Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 1024-1027
Author(s):  
Asma Samreen ◽  
Aamir Waseem ◽  
Muhammad Azam ◽  
Itrat Hussain Kazmi ◽  
Aamir Bashir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography ◽  
Recovery Time ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
P Value ◽  
Time Data ◽  
Endoscopic Retrograde ◽  
Intravenous Anesthetic ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Background: Procedural sedation is required for multiple short duration procedures outside of the operating rooms especially in radiology and endoscopy suites. Intravenous anesthetic agent with rapid recovery profile is desirable in such circumstances. This study aims to compare two regimens of intravenous anesthetic agents. Aim: To compare the mean recovery time of propofol and midazolam with propofol alone for sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial. Settings: Department of Anesthesia, Shalamar Hospital, Lahore. Study Duration: June 2017 to December 2017. Methods: A total of 70 adult patients aged 20-60 years undergoing ERCP under sedation were included. Patients were given a combination of propofol and midazolam in group A while propofol alone was given in group B. After procedure, pts were transferred to recovery room and were followed for assessment of recovery time. Data were analyzed in SPSS vr 21, Independent t-test was applied & p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Significant difference was found in mean recovery time amongst both the groups. Mean recovery time in Group A (propofol and midazolam) was 19.29±4.50 minutes while in Group B (propofol alone) was 26.66±3.70 minutes showing statistically significant result with p-value = 0.0001. Conclusion: We conclude that mean recovery time with propofol plus midazolam is shorter as compared to propofol alone for sedation in ERCP. Keywords: Propofol, midazolam, sedation outside operation theatre.

Combination Therapy Of Tadalafil And Pentoxifylline In Severe Erectile Dysfunction; A Prospective Randomized Trial

2015 ◽  
Vol 87 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Santosh Kumar ◽  
Rajesh Roat ◽  
Swati Agrawal ◽  
Kumar Jayant ◽  
Ravimohan S. Mavuduru ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Erectile Dysfunction ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Erectile Function ◽  
T Test ◽  
P Value ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Abstractwas to assess efficacy of Tadalafil alone versus Tadalafil plus Pentoxifylline in the treatment of erectile dysfunction by using self administered IIEF-5 questionnaire.Two hundred and thirty seven patients presenting with ED at andrology OPD were evaluated for ED by a self administered IIEF (International Index of Erectile Function) questionnaire. Patients were systematically randomized by computer generated random table into two groups groups namely, group A: Tadalafil only group, group B: combination of Tadalafil + Pentoxifyl-line. All the patients were re-assessed by IIEF-5 questionnaire after 8 weeks of medical therapy. Statistical analysis was performed using student’s unpaired t-test, paired t-test, chi square test. p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Two hundred and thirty seven patients were included in the present study, in group A: 92 patients (78.6%) showed improvement in their IIEF score after 8 weeks of tadalafil treatment. While in group B, overall 104 patients(86.6%) showed improvement after combination of Tadalafil and Pentoxifylline. There was a statistically significant difference of percentage change in IIEF score was seen in group B (group A 90.7±15.2%, group B 95.6±13.4%; p value – 0.014). We found this difference even more statistically significant in patients with severe ED (group A 72.7±47.2%, group B 132.3±54.3%; p value – 0.000). There was no significant difference in between the two groups with regards to occur-rence of side effects.Both tadalafil and combination of Tadalafil + Pentoxifylline improve erectile function in patients of ED. Patients with severe ED showed much significant improvement in erectile function with combination therapy.

scholarly journals HYPERLIPIDEMIC PATIENTS;

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (03) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marium Shoukat ◽  
Hijab Batool ◽  
Faiza Javaid
Keyword(s):  
Protective Role ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Atheromatous Plaque ◽  
P Value ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Apo B ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Objectives: Role of niacin in decreasing cardiovascular accidents by lowering the levels of Apo-B in hyperlipidemic patients. Background: In hyperlipidemia, there are high levels of atherogenic lipoproteins leading to higher risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events. Patients with dyslipidemia use statins as a mainstay of therapy over last many decades. Recent studies show that apolipoproteins play a major role in formation of atheromatous plaque, thus there is an urgent need to study the effects of lipid lowering medication on apolipoprotiens levels. Study Design: Cross sectional analytical study. Setting: Sheikh Zayed Hospital Lahore (Department of Biochemistry and Chemical Pathology). Period: 12 weeks from July to Sep 2014. Materials and Methods: Recently diagnosed hyperlipidemic patients (n=44) were selected for the study purpose and divided into two equal groups; A and B. Each group was given different medication. Group A took only statin while group B took a combination of statin and niacin. Blood samples were taken at the start of medication and then after completion of 12 week time period. Results: At the start of the treatment there was no significant difference in the Apo B cholesterol level between the two groups (p value 0.972). However, after the end of 12 week duration, there was a significant reduction in the Apo level of group B taking statin and niacin as compared to group A taking statin alone (p value 0.003). Conclusions: Niacin has cardio-protective role when used in combination with niacin.

scholarly journals Stenting versus Pharmacological Therapy in Treatment of Single Vessel Intermediate Culprit Lesion Stenosis in Acute St-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

2020 ◽  
pp. 99-106
Author(s):  
Hazem K. Shalaby ◽  
Ayman Mohammed El Saied ◽  
Hanan Kasem ◽  
Mai Salama ◽  
Seham Fahmy Badr
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Pharmacological Treatment ◽  
P Value ◽  
Culprit Lesion ◽  
Acute Stemi ◽  
Single Vessel ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Background: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation has been the standard therapy in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Compared with medical treatment alone, stent implanting can achieve larger lumen gain and helps to reduce the re-occlusion risk of the infarct-related artery. Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of stenting of single vessel intermediate culprit lesion stenosis to pharmacological treatment alone in acute STEMI patients. Methods: This study was prospective comparative interventional case series. It included 60 patients admitted to coronary care unit of our University hospital with acute STEMI. All patients were subjected to detailed history taking, clinical examination, 12 leads ECG, echocardiography and cardiac catheterization and angiography (TIMI flow and corrected TIMI frame count (CTFC) was reported. Patients selected were those with intermediate culprit lesion (40-70%) single vessel stenosis. Patients were divided into 2 groups: Group A: 30 patients who underwent stenting of the culprit lesion in addition to standard pharmacological treatment. Group B: 30 patients who received pharmacological treatment and no stenting (Glycoprotein II b/IIIa inhibitor in addition to the standard pharmacological treatment). Patients were followed up for 12 months and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were reported (death, myocardial infarction, coronary re-vascularization, stroke and hospitalization because of heart failure). Results: 63.3% of group A patients reported complete ST segment resolution versus 30% of group B (P=0.034). TIMI Flow showed statistically significant difference in group A compared to group B regarding (P value=0.005) Group A reported slow fast blood flow (CTFC<60) in 1 patient (3.3%) while in group B it was reported in 5 patients (16%). There was a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups regarding CTFC (P value=0.029). At 12 months follow up, MACE were reported in one patient of group A versus 4 patients of group B (P value >0.05). Conclusion: Stent implantation reported better immediate efficacy and safety results among acute STEMI patients with single vessel intermediate culprit lesion stenosis and favourable effects in reducing MACE.

scholarly journals A Comparative Study of 5.5mm Temporal Sclerocorneal Manual Small Incision Cataract Surgery Versus 5.5mm Temporal Clear Corneal Extended-incision Phacoemulsification with Implantation of a 5.25mm Rigid pmma Intraocular lens in the Bag

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
P Value ◽  
Small Incision Cataract Surgery ◽  
Corneal Incision ◽  
Small Incision ◽  
Clear Corneal Incision ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Objective: Aim of the study is to Compare the astigmatism induced by a reduced temporal sclerocorneal tunnel incision manual small incision cataract surgery with an extended temporal clear corneal Phacoemulsification of similar width . Methods: A Prospective, randomised controlled study was carried out in 224 selected patients who were again divided into two groups - Group A (112 patients) and Group B (112 patients). Group A patients underwent temporal manual small incision cataract surgery with a 5.5 mm sclerocorneal incision and Group B underwent phacoemulsification by a 2.8 mm clear corneal temporal incision which was extended to 5.5 mm before IOL implantation. In both groups, a 5.25 mm rigid PMMA IOL was implanted in the bag. UCVA and BCVA of both group of patients was quantified and analyzed at 1 week and at 6 weeks Observation: It was seen that the mean surgically Induced astigmatism in group A (N=112) was 0.5625D , which was slightly lesser than that in Group B (N=112) which was 0.65D, although the p-value of 0.26 indicated that there was statistically no significant difference in visual outcomes between the two groups of patients. Here, a p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Conclusion: In Skilled and Safe hands, refractive outcomes following performing a 5.5mm temporal sclerocorneal frown-incision manual small incision cataract surgery and a phacoemulsification procedure by a 2.8mm temporal clear corneal incision extended to 5.5mm for implanting a 5.25mm rigid PMMA IOL , are comparable.

scholarly journals Pancreaticogastrostomy as a choice of reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a hospital based observational study

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 619
Author(s):  
Hetish M. Reddy ◽  
Rajendra Bagree ◽  
Pradeep Panwar ◽  
Gaurav Jalendra
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
P Value ◽  
Multicenter Studies ◽  
Surgical Units ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Whipple’S Procedure ◽  
Group A ◽  
Randomized Control ◽  
Group B ◽  
Larger Sample

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the rate of occurrence of post-operative pancreatic fistulae (POPF) and other complications with pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) or pancreatojejunostomy (PJ) as a choice of reconstruction in classic Whipple’s Procedure.Methods: A hospital based prospective observational study collected data of 60 patients who underwent Whipple’s procedure from June 2018 to august 2019, in two different surgical units, where one-unit preferred PG as routine while the other unit preferred PJ.Results: Two out of 30 patients who underwent PG (Group A) developed POPF while Nine out of 30 patients who underwent PJ (Group B) developed POPF (p-value = 0.04) indicating a significant difference in outcome. The duration of hospital stay (DOHS) in our study in Group A was 12.82±1.74 days when compared to Group B was 13.88±2.01 days (p-value = 0.042).Conclusions: Our results indicate that the preferred reconstruction after classic Pancreaticoduodenectomy should be Pancreaticogastrostomy, but further validation with randomized control trials or multicenter studies with larger sample size are required.

scholarly journals COMPARISON OF ONDANSETRON AND METOCLOPRAMIDE IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY UNDER GENERAL ANESTHESIA.

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (07) ◽  
pp. 1197-1202
Author(s):  
Hajra Shuja ◽  
Mehmood Ali Shah ◽  
Sadaf Bokhari
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
P Value ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
High Incidence ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Trial Setting

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a standard treatment for cholelithiasis. It is a safe and effective treatment in many cases. General anesthesia has a high incidence for PONV. But anti-emetic drugs can help in preventing PONV. Objectives: To compare the efficacy of ondansetron and metoclopramide in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Department of Anaesthesia, Sheikh Zayed Hospital, Lahore. Period: 6 months i.e. from 15-2-2017 to 15-8-2017. Material & Methods: The patients were divided into two groups. Ondansetron was given to group A patients within 15 minutes of induction, and metoclopramide to group B patients within 15 minutes of induction. Then patients were shifted to the ward after surgery and followed-up for 24 hours for assessment of PONV. All the data was entered and analyzed on SPSS version 20. Results: The mean age of patients in group A was 38.40±12.07 years and in group B was 42.63±11.77 years. The efficacy achieved in 53 were from group A and 39 were from group B Statistically significant difference was found between the study groups i.e. p-value=0.003. Conclusion: Ondansetron showed significantly better efficacy than metoclopramide in preventing PONV after laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document