Cargando…

Efficacy and Safety of Different Aceclofenac Treatments for Chronic Lower Back Pain: Prospective, Randomized, Single Center, Open-Label Clinical Trials

PURPOSE: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are a mainstay for medical treatment of chronic lower back pain (CLBP). Increased dose intervals for medication have been associated with increased patient adherence to prescriptions. The purpose of this clinical trial was to compare the efficacy and saf...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yang, Jae-Ho, Suk, Kyung-Soo, Lee, Byung-Ho, Jung, Woo-Chul, Kang, Young-Mi, Kim, Ji-Hye, Kim, Hak-Sun, Lee, Hwan-Mo, Moon, Seong-Hwan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Yonsei University College of Medicine 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5368152/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28332372
http://dx.doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2017.58.3.637
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are a mainstay for medical treatment of chronic lower back pain (CLBP). Increased dose intervals for medication have been associated with increased patient adherence to prescriptions. The purpose of this clinical trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of a once daily dose of aceclofenac controlled release (CR) and a twice daily dose of aceclofenac for CLBP management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single center, open-label clinical trial was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of aceclofenac CR (200 mg once daily) to aceclofenac dose (100 mg twice daily). Fifty patients in each group were enrolled for the study. The primary end point was Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) change at baseline to that at 2 weeks after medication and safety profiles. Also, change in quality of life measured by EuroQoL 5D (EQ-5D) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) functional score for the lumbar spine were also assessed. RESULTS: Within groups at pre- and post-treatment, there were significant VAS reductions for aceclofenac CR and aceclofenac (p=0.028). EQ-5D increased significantly in both groups (p=0.037). ODI scores decreased significantly in both groups (p=0.012). However, there were no significant differences between aceclofenac CR and aceclofenac at pre- and post-treatment. Patients with aceclofenac CR showed significant increases in heartburn and indigestion and adverse gastrointestinal effects, compared to aceclofenac. CONCLUSION: In patients with CLBP, aceclofenac CR and aceclofenac demonstrated significant symptomatic pain relief, improvement in quality of life and functional scores. Aceclofenac CR slightly increased gastrointestinal adverse effects, such as heartburn and indigestion.