ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2013
Randomized controlled study of the antipyretic efficacy of oral paracetamol, intravenous paracetamol, and intramuscular diclofenac in patients presenting with fever to the emergency department.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFever is a common problem in adults visiting the emergency department. Extensive studies have been done in children comparing the efficacy of various antipyretics. However, studies on the efficacy of antipyretic drugs in adults are very scarce. To the best of our knowledge, no controlled trial has been carried out comparing the antipyretic efficacy of paracetamol (oral and intravenous) and intramuscular diclofenac in adults.
methodsIn this parallel-group, open-label trial, participants aged 14-75 years presenting with fever who had a temperature of more than 38.5°C were enrolled and treated. Participants were randomly allocated to receive treatment with 1,000 mg oral paracetamol (n = 145), 1,000 mg intravenous paracetamol (n = 139), or 75 mg intramuscular diclofenac (n = 150). The primary outcome was degree of reduction in mean oral temperature at 90 minutes. The efficacy of diclofenac versus oral and intravenous paracetamol was assessed by superiority comparison. Analysis was done using intention to treat principles.
resultsAfter 90 minutes, all three groups showed a significant reduction in mean temperature, with intramuscular diclofenac showing the greatest reduction (-1.44 ± 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.4 to -2.5) and oral paracetamol the least (-1.08 ± 0.51, 95% CI -0.99 to -2.2). After 120 minutes, there was a significant difference observed in the mean change from baseline temperature between the three treatment groups (P < 0.0001). Significant changes in temperature were observed in favor of intramuscular diclofenac over oral and intravenous paracetamol at each time point from 60 minutes through 120 minutes inclusive.
conclusionBoth intramuscular diclofenac and intravenous paracetamol showed superior antipyretic activity than oral paracetamol. However, in view of its ease of administration, intramuscular diclofenac can be used as a first-choice antipyretic in febrile adults in the emergency department.
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.