Current Issue : April - June Volume : 2018 Issue Number : 2 Articles : 5 Articles
A European placebo-controlled trial of antibiotic treatment for lower respiratory tract\ninfection (LRTI) conducted in 16 primary care practices networks recruited participants between\nNovember 2007 and April 2010, and found adverse events (AEs) occurred more often in patients\nprescribed amoxicillin compared to placebo. This secondary analysis explores the causal relationship\nand estimates specific AEs (diarrhoea, nausea, rash) due to amoxicillin treatment for LRTI, and if\nany subgroup is at increased risk of any or a specific AE. A total of 2061 patients were randomly\nassigned to amoxicillin (1038) and placebo (1023); 595 (28%) were 60 and older. A significantly\nhigher proportion of any AEs (diarrhoea or nausea or rash) (OR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.05ââ?¬â??1.64, number\nneeded to harm (NNH) = 24) and of diarrhoea (OR 1.43 95% CI 1.08ââ?¬â??1.90, NNH = 29) was reported\nin the amoxicillin group during the first week after randomisation. Subgroup analysis showed rash\nwas significantly more often reported in males prescribed amoxicillin (interaction term 3.72 95%\nCI 1.22ââ?¬â??11.36; OR of amoxicillin in males 2.79 (95% CI 1.08ââ?¬â??7.22). No other subgroup at higher risk\nwas identified. Although the study was not powered for subgroup analysis, this analysis suggests\nthat most patients are likely to be equally harmed when prescribed antibiotics....
We compared the efficacy of diclofenac potassium in unpublished clinical study reports (CSRs) and published reports to examine\npublication bias, industry bias, and comprehensiveness. Novartis provided CSRs of randomised double-blind trials of diclofenac\npotassium involving postoperative patients following third molar extraction (3 trials, n 519), gynaecological surgery (3 trials,\nn 679), and dysmenorrhoea (2 trials, n 711) conducted in 1988ââ?¬â??1990. Searches identified published reports of 6 trials.\nInformation from 599/1909 patients was not published; trials with 846/1909 patients were published in a defunct journal. Greater\nmethodological information in CSRs contributed to lesser risk of bias than published trials. Numbers needed to treat (NNT) from\nCSRs for all six postoperative trials for at least 50% of maximum pain relief over 6 h were 2.2 (95% confidence interval, 1.9ââ?¬â??2.6) and\n2.1 (1.8ââ?¬â??2.4) for 50 and 100mg diclofenac potassium, respectively. A Cochrane review of published trial data reported NNTs of 2.1\nand 1.9, and one comprehensive analysis reported NNTs of 2.2 and 2.1, respectively. All analyses had similar results for patients\nremedicating within 8 h.No data from dysmenorrhoea CSRs appeared in a Cochrane review. CSRs provide useful information and\nincrease confidence. Stable efficacy estimates with standard study designs reduce the need for updating reviews....
Tissue regeneration has become a promising treatment for craniomaxillofacial bone defects such as alveolar clefts. This study sought\nto assess the efficacy of lateral ramus cortical plate with buccal fat pad derived mesenchymal stem cells (BFSCs) in treatment of\nhuman alveolar cleft defects. Ten patients with unilateral anterior maxillary cleft met the inclusion criteria and were assigned to\nthree treatment groups. First group was treated with anterior iliac crest (AIC) bone and a collagen membrane (AIC group), the\nsecond group was treated with lateral ramus cortical bone plate (LRCP) with BFSCs mounted on a natural bovine bone mineral\n(LRCP+BFSC), and the third group was treated with AIC bone, BFSCs cultured on natural bovine bone mineral, and a collagen\nmembrane (AIC+BFSC). The amount of regenerated bone was measured using cone beam computed tomography 6 months\npostoperatively. AIC group showed the least amount of new bone formation (70 �± 10.40%). LRCP+BFSC group demonstrated\ndefect closure and higher amounts of new bone formation (75 �± 3.5%) but less than AIC+BFSC (82.5 �± 6.45%), suggesting that use\nof BFSCs within LRCP cage and AIC may enhance bone regeneration in alveolar cleft bone defects; however, the differences were\nnot statistically significant. This clinical trial was registered at clinicaltrial.gov with NCT02859025 identifier....
Clinical research plays a fundamental role in establishing new treatments. Clinical research\ncoordinators are considered essential in clinical research, and medical professionals such as\npharmacists often take on this role. Pharmacy students can be considered future candidates for\nthis task. We used questionnaires to survey the knowledge of and attitudes toward registration trials\nand clinical research of pharmacy students at Tokushima University Hospital. All pharmacy students\n(103) to whom questionnaires were sent responded. Almost all respondents were aware of registration\ntrials and clinical research. More than 90% were aware of the existence of clinical research coordinators,\nand about half (48.6%) understood their role. In clinical research terminology, most respondents\nwere aware of informed consent and related issues, but fewer than 20% were aware of more practical\nthings. In total, 29.1% and 40.8% of the respondents were willing to carry out and coordinate research.\nThese findings suggest that pharmacy students have basic knowledge of clinical research and that\nmany students are willing to carry out and coordinate clinical research. More practical exposure\nto clinical research may help to strengthen their future contribution. Further studies may help to\ndetermine how to provide education on registration trials and clinical research to pharmacy students....
The objective of this study was to compare single-needle arthrocentesis with distension of the upper compartment of the\ntemporomandibular joint (TMJ) with the conventional two-needle arthrocentesis. Twenty-six patients with articular disc\ndisplacement without reduction (DDWOR) were included in the study and assigned to two groups (...
Loading....