J Clin Pharmacol
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Moore, P.
Right arrow Articles by Bakos, L
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Moore, P.
Right arrow Articles by Bakos, L

Articles

Tramadol hydrochloride: analgesic efficacy compared with codeine, aspirin with codeine, and placebo after dental extraction

PA Moore, RJ Crout, DL Jackson, LG Schneider, RW Graves, and L Bakos

Tramadol hydrochloride is a novel, centrally acting analgesic with two complementary mechanisms of action: opioid and aminergic. Relative to codeine, tramadol has similar analgesic properties but may have fewer constipating, euphoric, and respiratory depressant effects. A two-center randomized double-blind controlled clinical trial was performed to assess the analgesic efficacy and reported side effects of tramadol 100 mg, tramadol 50 mg, codeine 60 mg, aspirin (ASA) 650 mg with codeine 60 mg, and placebo. Using a third molar extraction pain model, 200 healthy subjects were enrolled in a 6-hour evaluation after a single dose of drug. Of the 200 patients enrolled, seven provided incomplete efficacy data or discontinued prematurely and one was lost to follow-up. Using standard measures of analgesia, including total pain relief score (TOTPAR), maximum pain relief score (MaxPAR), sum of pain intensity difference scores (SPID), peak pain intensity difference (Peak PID), remedication, and global evaluations, all active treatments were found to be numerically superior to placebo. ASA/codeine was found to be statistically superior to placebo for all measures of efficacy. Tramadol 100 mg was statistically superior to placebo for TOTPAR, SPID, and time of remedication, whereas tramadol 50 mg was statistically superior to placebo onlyfor remedication time. Codeine was not found to be statistically superior to placebo for any efficacy measure. A greater TOTPAR response compared with all other active measures was seen for ASA/codeine during the first 3 hours of study. The 6-hour TOTPAR scores for the tramadol groups and ASA/ codeine group were not significantly different. Gastrointestinal side effects (nausea, dysphagia, vomiting) were reported more frequently with tramadol 100 mg, ASA/ codeine, and codeine 60 mg than with placebo.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of the American Dental AssociationHome page
D. R. MEHLISCH
The efficacy of combination analgesic therapy in relieving dental pain
J Am Dent Assoc, July 1, 2002; 133(7): 861 - 871.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American College of Clinical Pharmacology