Trial reportFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2026
Comparative evaluation of the antipyretic and analgesic efficacy and safety of a fast-release paracetamol 650 mg formulation vs. conventional paracetamol formulations in adults with acute febrile or febrile-pain conditions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2026. 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.
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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Paracetamol is widely used for management of fever/pain. With increasing emphasis on rapid symptom relief, this study compared the response following a single 650 mg oral dose of four commercially available tablets in acute febrile and febrile-pain conditions. Methods: This multicenter, open-label trial (CTRI/2025/12/098995) included adults (18-60 years) with oral temperature ≥38 °C (with/without pain) and symptom onset within ≤72 h. Consenting participants were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive a single dose of the test fast release test paracetamol (A) and conventional paracetamol (B, C, D) drug. Oral body temperature(digital thermometer) and pain (numerical rating scale (NRS) were assessed at predefined intervals till 90 ± 2 min. Outcomes included magnitude and onset of antipyretic and analgesic effects, adverse events (AEs), and patient satisfaction. Results: Among 220 febrile participants (55% women; mean temperature 38.51 °C), 169 reported pain (mean NRS score 7.31). At 90 ± 2 min, fast release paracetamol demonstrated significantly greater reduction in temperature (1.54 °C), along with the fastest rate of decline (1.03 °C/hr), and the shortest restricted mean time to defervescence (84.27 min), resulting in majority of participants (60.0%) experiencing defervescence (temperature ≤37 °C). Pain reduction was also significantly greater with fast release test paracetamol (5.2 units; 3.4 units/hr), with onset of analgesia (≥30% reduction in NRS score) after a comparatively shorter median time (30 min; conventional, 60-90 min). By 90 ± 2 min, pain resolved (NRS score = 0) in 23.2% (A), 22.5% (B), 11.9% (C), and 6.8% (D) participants, with restricted mean times to resolution being 90.00, 89.25, 89.29, and 90.00 min, respectively. Overall, 82.2% participants reported treatment satisfaction, with likelihood highest for fast-release test paracetamol (A). Four participants reported unrelated, mild/moderate AEs. Conclusion: All evaluated paracetamol 650 mg formulations demonstrated antipyretic and analgesic activity within 90 min, while the fast-release formulation showed earlier and, for several assessed outcomes, greater reductions in temperature and pain. These findings may support consideration of formulation choice when rapid early symptomatic relief is desired. Clinical Trial Registration: CTRI/2025/12/098995.
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.