首页> 外文期刊>Headache >Acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine in combination versus ibuprofen for acute migraine: results from a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, single-dose, placebo-controlled study.
【24h】

Acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine in combination versus ibuprofen for acute migraine: results from a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, single-dose, placebo-controlled study.

机译:对乙酰氨基酚,阿司匹林和咖啡因联合布洛芬治疗急性偏头痛:多中心,双盲,随机,平行分组,单剂量,安慰剂对照研究的结果。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: Compare the effectiveness of a combination analgesic containing acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine to that of ibuprofen in the treatment of migraine. METHODS: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, single-dose study. A total of 1555 migraineurs were included in the analysis. No patients were excluded solely because of severity of symptoms or degree of disability. A single 2-tablet dose for each of the 3 treatment groups: a combination product containing acetaminophen 250 mg, aspirin 250 mg, and caffeine 65 mg per tablet (AAC); ibuprofen 200 mg per tablet (IB); or matching placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the weighted sum of pain relief (PAR) scores at 2 hours postdose (TOTPAR2) and an important secondary endpoint was the time to onset of meaningful relief. RESULTS: There were 669 patients in the AAC group, 666 patients in the IB group, and 220 patients in the placebo group. The 3 treatment groups had similar demographic profiles, migraine histories, and baseline symptom profiles. While both active treatments were significantly better than placebo in relieving the pain and associated symptoms of migraine, AAC was superior to IB for TOTPAR2, as well as for PAR, time to onset of meaningful PAR, pain intensity reduction, headache response, and pain free. The mean TOTPAR2 scores for AAC, IB, and placebo were 2.7, 2.4, and 2.0, respectively (AAC vs. IB, P < .03). The median time to meaningful PAR for AAC was 20 minutes earlier than that of IB (P < .036). CONCLUSION: AAC and IB are safe, cost-effective treatments for migraine; AAC provides significantly superior efficacy and speed of onset compared with IB.
机译:目的:比较含对乙酰氨基酚,阿司匹林和咖啡因的联合镇痛药与布洛芬对偏头痛的治疗效果。方法:多中心,双盲,随机,平行组,安慰剂对照,单剂量研究。分析中总共包括1555个移民。没有患者仅因症状严重或残疾程度而被排除在外。 3个治疗组中的每一个均服用2片片剂:每片含对乙酰氨基酚250 mg,阿司匹林250 mg和咖啡因65 mg的联合产品(AAC);布洛芬200毫克每片(IB);或匹配的安慰剂。主要疗效终点是给药后2小时的疼痛缓解(PAR)评分的加权总和(TOTPAR2),重要的次要终点是有意义的缓解发作的时间。结果:AAC组有669例患者,IB组有666例患者,安慰剂组有220例患者。 3个治疗组的人口统计学特征,偏头痛历史和基线症状特征相似。尽管两种有效的疗法在缓解偏头痛的疼痛和相关症状方面均显着优于安慰剂,但对于TOTPAR2和PAR,有意义的PAR发作时间,减轻疼痛强度,缓解头痛和无疼痛,AAC优于IB。 。 AAC,IB和安慰剂的平均TOTPAR2评分分别为2.7、2.4和2.0(AAC与IB的比较,P <.03)。 AAC达到有意义PAR的中位时间比IB提前20分钟(P <.036)。结论:AAC和IB是治疗偏头痛的安全,经济的方法。与IB相比,AAC具有明显优越的疗效和发病速度。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号