Comparison of Oral Ibuprofen at Three Single-Dose Regimens for Treating Acute Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial - 19/09/19
Abstract |
Study objective |
Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used extensively for the management of acute pain, with ibuprofen being one of the most frequently used oral analgesics in the emergency department (ED). We compare the analgesic efficacy of oral ibuprofen at 3 different doses for adult ED patients with acute pain.
Methods |
This was a randomized, double-blind trial comparing analgesic efficacy of 3 doses of oral ibuprofen (400, 600, and 800 mg) in adult ED patients with acute painful conditions. Primary outcome included difference in pain scores between the 3 groups at 60 minutes.
Results |
We enrolled 225 subjects (75 per group). The difference in mean pain scores at 60 minutes between the 400- and 600-mg groups was –0.14 (95% confidence interval [CI] –0.67 to 0.39); between the 400- and 800-mg groups, 0.14 (95% CI –0.65 to 0.37); and between the 600- and 800-mg groups, 0.00 (95% CI –0.47 to 0.47). Reductions in pain scores from baseline to 60 minutes were similar for all subjects in each of the 3 groups. No adverse events occurred in any group.
Conclusion |
Oral ibuprofen administered at doses of 400, 600, and 800 mg has similar analgesic efficacy for short-term pain relief in adult patients presenting to the ED with acute pain.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
Please see page 531 for the Editor’s Capsule Summary of this article. |
|
Supervising editor: Steven M. Green, MD. Specific detailed information about possible conflict of interest for individual editors is available at editors. |
|
Author contributions: SM was responsible for study concept and design. All authors were responsible for acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data. AL and PF were responsible for statistical analysis. SM and JD drafted the article. SM and JM were responsible for critical revision of the article for important intellectual content. SM, AL, and JM were responsible for study supervision. SM takes responsibility for the paper as a whole. |
|
All authors attest to meeting the four ICMJE.org authorship criteria: (1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND (2) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND (3) Final approval of the version to be published; AND (4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. |
|
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org). The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. This research was supported by a grant from the Maimonides Research and Development Foundation. |
|
Trial registration number: NCT03441269 |
|
Readers: click on the link to go directly to a survey in which you can provide XRBHP7T to Annals on this particular article. |
|
A podcast for this article is available at www.annemergmed.com. |
Vol 74 - N° 4
P. 530-537 - octobre 2019 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?