4.0 Article

Gabapentin in the treatment of fibromyalgia - A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial

期刊

ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM
卷 56, 期 4, 页码 1336-1344

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/art.22457

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. To assess the efficacy and safety of gabapentin in patients with fibromyalgia. Methods. A 12-week, randomized, double-blind study was designed to compare gabapentin (1,200-2,400 mg/day) (n = 75 patients) with placebo (n = 75 patients) for efficacy and safety in treating pain associated with fibromyalgia. The primary outcome measure was the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) average pain severity score (range 0-10, where 0 = no pain and 10 = pain as bad as you can imagine). Response to treatment was defined as a reduction of >= 30% in this score. The primary analysis of efficacy for continuous variables was a longitudinal analysis of the intent-to-treat sample, with treatment-by-time interaction as the measure of effect. Results. Gabapentin-treated patients displayed a significantly greater improvement in the BPI average pain severity score (P = 0.015; estimated difference between groups at week 12 = -0.92 [95% confidence interval -1.75, -0.71]). A significantly greater proportion of gabapentin-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients achieved response at end point (51% versus 31%; P = 0.014). Gabapentin compared with placebo also significantly improved the BPI average pain interference score, the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire total score, the Clinical Global Impression of Severity, the Patient Global Impression of Improvement, the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Problems Index, and the MOS Short Form 36 vitality score, but not the mean tender point pain threshold or the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale. Gabapentin was generally well tolerated. Conclusion. Gabapentin(1,200-2,400 mg/day) is safe and efficacious for the treatment of pain and other symptoms associated with fibromyalgia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据