ArticleInternational journal of clinical practice2007
Patient satisfaction with eletriptan in the acute treatment of migraine in primary care.
Article in International journal of clinical practice, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of celecoxib versus ibuprofen for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: A randomized double-blind, non-inferiority trial.The Journal of international medical research · 2017Trial
- Eletriptan in the management of acute migraine: an update on the evidence for efficacy, safety, and consistent response.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2016Review
- Health-related quality of life and treatment satisfaction in patients with gout: results from a cross-sectional study in a managed care setting.Patient preference and adherence · 2015Article
- Clinical management of patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis: patient satisfaction with treatment switch.Rheumatology international · 2014Article
- Treatment satisfaction instruments for different purposes during a product's lifecycle: keeping the end in mind.The patient · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe efficacy of triptans for acute migraine has been well established in clinical trials but not in primary care, where they are most commonly prescribed. The aim of this open-label study was to evaluate the effectiveness of eletriptan 40 mg in primary care, using a patient-weighted satisfaction scale.
methodsEligible patients met International Headache Society criteria for migraine, with 1-6 attacks per month. Patients completed questionnaires at screening and following a single eletriptan-treated attack. Treatment satisfaction was evaluated using a six-item Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ). MSQ item scores were weighted, based on the important score ratings, to yield individualised satisfaction scores. The primary end-point was the difference in weighted satisfaction scores between the patient's previous treatment and eletriptan 40 mg. Secondary end-points assessed quality of life (QOL), functioning and efficacy of treatment.
resultsOf 590 patients screened, 437 completed the study. Degree (95.2%), time (88.8%) and duration (83.8%) of headache pain relief were rated as most important by patients. The mean (+/-SD) total satisfaction score on the MSQ was higher for eletriptan than previous therapy (2.2 +/- 3.0 vs. 0.6 +/- 2.4; p < 0.001). The high level of satisfaction with eletriptan vs. previous treatment reflects the improvements in QOL and functioning observed, and the high headache and pain-free response rates.
conclusionsPatient-weighted satisfaction with eletriptan 40 mg was higher than with previous treatment for all items. The use of patient-weighted importance ratings of satisfaction is a promising approach for establishing effectiveness of treatment in primary care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.