{"id":43063,"date":"2022-03-31T10:44:47","date_gmt":"2022-03-31T10:44:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/?p=43063"},"modified":"2022-04-08T06:49:19","modified_gmt":"2022-04-08T06:49:19","slug":"a-comparative-study-of-efficacy-and-tolerability-of-fixed-dose-combination-of-etoricoxib-and-thiocolchicoside-versus-thiocolchicoside-alone-in-patients-with-painful-muscle-spasms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/vol15no1\/a-comparative-study-of-efficacy-and-tolerability-of-fixed-dose-combination-of-etoricoxib-and-thiocolchicoside-versus-thiocolchicoside-alone-in-patients-with-painful-muscle-spasms\/","title":{"rendered":"A Comparative Study of Efficacy and Tolerability of Fixed-Dose Combination of Etoricoxib and Thiocolchicoside versus Thiocolchicoside alone in Patients with Painful Muscle Spasms"},"content":{"rendered":"

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

Muscle spasms occurring in the general population are of varying prevalence depending upon various etiologies.1 <\/sup>They accompany degenerative or inflammatory diseases\u00a0affecting the musculoskeletal system.2<\/sup> Muscular spasms may occur when there is involuntary and forcible contraction of the muscle and cannot relax, as seen in conditions when it is\u00a0overused, strained, fatigued as a result of stress, over exercising or dehydration. Usually it is self-limiting but if it delays, the consequences of it include absenteeism from work,\u00a0unwarranted hospital and treatment costs and sometimes disablement. Its impact is seen on the society economically and socially.3 <\/sup>Therefore this condition should be addressed and\u00a0effectively managed.<\/p>\n

By definition, a muscle spasm is a sustained involuntary contraction of a muscle that is usually painful and cannot be relieved completely by voluntary effort.2 \u00a0<\/sup>Conditions\u00a0involving \u00a0<\/sup>backache, neuralgias, torticollis, lumbosacral strain are associated with painful muscle spasms, which are treated with short-term use of centrally acting muscle relaxants\u00a0combined with analgesics; but efficacy and tolerability are not impressive.4<\/sup><\/p>\n

Skeletal muscle relaxants are a class of drugs belonging to the diverse group, whose utility is seen in conditions involving centrally to reduce the muscle tone by acting at the\u00a0cerebrospinal axis or to reduce muscular pain or spasms by acting peripherally at the neuromuscular junction or muscle fibre.5<\/sup> Having a different mechanism of action, most of\u00a0them act via their sedative property.<\/p>\n

In general, majority of the centrally acting skeletal muscle relaxants used to treat muscle spasms have significant side effects such as sedation, drowsiness, mental confusion,\u00a0weakness, ataxia, hallucinations, sudden withdrawal symptoms and anticholinergic side effects like dry mouth. Therefore, often the patient shows reduced compliance which leads to\u00a0inefficacy in managing the painful spasms, resulting in reduced work capacity.4<\/sup><\/p>\n

Thiocolchicoside is derived semi-synthetically from colchicine which is extracted from the flower seeds of the species Gloriosa superb<\/em> and Colchicum autumnale.6,7,8 \u00a0<\/sup><\/em>It acts on\u00a0the inhibitory neurotransmitters, glycine and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-A receptors, of the central nervous system. It is a muscle relaxant with anti-inflammatory and additive\u00a0analgesic effects.9,10,11 \u00a0<\/sup>It \u00a0is clinically used from past four decades for the treatment of muscle pain and contractures in patients with orthopaedic, rheumatologic, or musculoskeletal\u00a0disorders. It is used in various formulations-oral, parenteral, topical via transdermal and in the form of non-greasy topical foams or gels.11,12 \u00a0<\/sup>Being well-tolerated, it has the advantage of\u00a0reduced or no sedative effects, which is a drawback in the use of other muscle relaxants. It\u2019s non-sedative property can be explained due to non-interference with nicotinic receptors. 8,13<\/sup><\/p>\n

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the medications which are routinely used for various musculoskeletal conditions worldwide. Currently, the selective Cyclooxygenase\u00a0(COX)-2 inhibitors, a subclass of NSAIDs, have superseded the traditional NSAIDs which inhibit both consecutive COX-1 (responsible for gastrointestinal adverse effects) and\u00a0inducible COX-2. Though the COX-2 NSAIDs and traditional NSAIDs show no significant difference statistically in the reduction of pain, the former has fewer gastrointestinal complications.14,15\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/sup><\/p>\n

Etoricoxib is a newer selective COX-2 inhibitor, having greater COX-2 selectivity compared to its congeners rofecoxib, valdecoxib, or celecoxib with gastroprotection being its advantage over other traditional NSAIDS.15 Fixed-dose combinations of NSAIDs and skeletal muscle relaxants may cause reduction in pain by acting through two different mechanisms\u00a0and also the combined \u00a0skeletal muscle relaxant can reduce the doses of NSAID making them much more favourable.3,16,17<\/sup><\/p>\n

Firstly, despite using skeletal muscle relaxants and analgesics for painful muscle spasms, the outcome is less promising and hence there is a need to reduce the social and economic disability by choosing an appropriate pharmacotherapy. Secondly, there are a lot of research done involving NSAIDs and muscle relaxants in FDC\u2019s but no published data comparing the FDC\u2019s of Etoricoxib and thiocolchicoside with thiocolchicoside monotherapy. Hence this comparative study to evaluate the objectives, efficacy and tolerability of the above two groups of drugs is conducted on the subjects with painful muscle spasms.<\/p>\n

Materials and Methods<\/strong><\/p>\n

Study Design<\/strong><\/p>\n

This prospective comparative study which was randomized and open-label was conducted from December 2018 to May 2019 in the Orthopaedic outpatient department\u00a0(OPD) of Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences, Bangalore. Approval of the study protocol was taken from the Institutional Ethics Committee and as well, obtaining written informed consent from all the study subjects. Registration of the trial was done with Clinical Trial Registry India (CTRI\/ 2018\/11\/022223).<\/p>\n

Study subjects<\/strong><\/p>\n

A total of 100 participants who fulfilled the specified inclusion and exclusion criteria were screened and then randomized to receive either of the two treatment protocols.<\/p>\n

Inclusion criteria<\/strong><\/p>\n

All male and female subjects aged between 18-65yrs presenting to the Orthopaedic OPD with localized, uncomplicated, non-traumatic painful muscle spasm of recent onset (1-30 days) and who are willing to give written informed consent and available for regular follow up and examination were included in the study.<\/p>\n

Exclusion criteria <\/strong><\/p>\n

Subjects with a history of kidney and liver damage, gastrointestinal bleeding or acid peptic diseases, cardiovascular disease, pregnant and lactating mothers, those allergic to\u00a0NSAIDS and skeletal muscle relaxants or prior history of hypersensitivity reactions or asthma; those potentially requiring auxiliary treatment; those who were treated with NSAIDs\u00a0or skeletal muscle relaxants 1 week before the study; those with severe concurrent systemic diseases including bleeding diathesis, on anticoagulant therapy and those with osteoporosis,\u00a0malignancy, or previous surgical history of lumbar spine \u00a0were excluded from the study.<\/p>\n

Treatment procedure<\/strong><\/p>\n

After obtaining the demographic data and relevant medical history from the eligible study subjects, they underwent randomization through simple randomization procedure in the\u00a0ratio 1:1 divided equally into two treatment groups, GROUP-1 and GROUP-2, each receiving the b.i.d dose of the treatments for 7 days. GROUP-1 (50 subjects) received FDC of\u00a0Etoricoxib (60mg) with Thiocolchicoside (4mg) and GROUP-2 (50 subjects) received Thiocolchicoside (4mg) alone. Follow up of the study subjects was done for another week to\u00a0ascertain complete remission of pain and none of them required any rescue medications.<\/p>\n

Efficacy assessments<\/strong><\/p>\n

The primary efficacy outcome measure was evaluated for the intensity of pain at rest and on movement on day 1 (visit 0, baseline), day 3 (visit 1), and day 7 (visit 2) using a 10\u00a0cm Visual analogue scale (VAS) as reported by a patient where 0 implies no pain and 10 implies unbearable pain.<\/p>\n

The secondary efficacy outcome measure included Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (GART). The clinician and the patient independently assessed the efficacy and\u00a0tolerability at the end of the study (day 7) on a 5 point scale (0-Poor, 1-Fair, 2-Good, 3-Very Good, 4- Excellent).<\/p>\n

At each visit the adverse events if any, were recorded.<\/p>\n

Statistical analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n

A sample size of 100 participants was calculated (50 in each group) based on 90% prevalence of the disease as stated in previous studies, with a 95% confidence interval (CI),\u00a05% type I error, and precision of 0.05.<\/p>\n

Results for continuous data were expressed as mean \u00b1 standard; the discrete data were represented as numbers and percentages. Variables, within the group, were compared with\u00a0paired t-test. Variables, between the groups, were compared with an independent t-test. Non-parametric data which included Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (GART) was\u00a0assessed using Mann-Whitney U-test. 95% confidence level (p<0.05) was taken as statistical significance.<\/p>\n

Results <\/strong><\/p>\n

In our study, 100 subjects were totally enrolled, with 50 in both the groups and all of them finished the study. Figure 1 depicts the flow of study participants. The demographics\u00a0and the baseline characteristics are compared as in Table 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"Vol15No1_Com_Pri_fig1\"<\/a><\/td>\nFigure 1: Study Flowchart.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to view figure\u00a0<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Table 1: Demographic and baseline characteristics.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
PARAMETERS<\/strong><\/td>\nGROUP- 1<\/strong><\/p>\n

(ETORICOXIB + THIOCOLCHOCOSIDE)<\/strong><\/p>\n

n=50<\/strong><\/td>\n

GROUP- 2<\/strong><\/p>\n

(THIOCOLCHICOSIDE ALONE)<\/strong><\/p>\n

n=50<\/strong><\/td>\n

p Value\u03b4<\/sup><\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

AGE (yrs)<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n

38.44 \u00b1 11.32*<\/td>\n38.36 \u00b1 10.53*<\/td>\n0.9709<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

WEIGHT (kgs) <\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n

66.8 \u00b1 8.02*<\/td>\n68.12 \u00b17.11*<\/td>\n0.3860<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

HEIGHT (cm)<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\n

159.74 \u00b1 4.81*<\/td>\n161.43 \u00b1 6.57*<\/td>\n0.1454<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
GENDER (%)<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/td>\n

Male<\/td>\n18 (9%)<\/td>\n22 (11%)<\/td>\n\n

0.7401<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

 <\/p>\n

Female<\/td>\n

32 (16%)<\/td>\n28 (14%)<\/td>\n0.7805<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
*Results are expressed as mean \u00b1 standard deviation.<\/p>\n

\u03b4<\/sup>Significance (p value) obtained using an unpaired t-test<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Of the 100 participants, 60% (n=60) were female participants and 40% (n=40) were male participants (p=0.13). There was no statistically significant difference with the gender\u00a0distribution (p> 0.05). The incidence of muscle spasms was found to be more among the age group 35-45years (n=28, 28%) as shown in the Table 2 and Figure 2. Mean body weight was\u00a065.15 \u00b1 4.55 in GROUP-1 and 63.11 \u00b1 5.43 in GROUP-2. Mean height was 160.23 \u00b1 2.45 in GROUP-1 and 162.83 \u00b1 5.67 in GROUP-2.<\/p>\n

Table 2: Age and gender distribution<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Age and gender distribution<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

AGE (YRS)<\/strong><\/td>\nMALE<\/strong><\/td>\nFEMALE<\/strong><\/td>\n\n

Percentage of Participants<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

18-25<\/strong><\/td>\n2<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n\n

5%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

26-35<\/strong><\/td>\n7<\/td>\n17<\/td>\n\n

24%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

36-45<\/strong><\/td>\n11<\/td>\n17<\/td>\n\n

28%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

46-55<\/strong><\/td>\n14<\/td>\n13<\/td>\n27%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
56-65<\/strong><\/td>\n6<\/td>\n10<\/td>\n16%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
TOTAL<\/strong><\/td>\n40%<\/td>\n60%<\/td>\np value = 0.13<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"Vol15No1_Com_Pri_fig2\"<\/a><\/td>\nFigure 2: Distribution of age across the groups<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to view figure\u00a0<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Primary Efficacy endpoint<\/strong><\/p>\n

Pain scores as assessed by VAS showed a statistically significant reduction (p<0.0001) with movement and at rest from day 1 to day 7 within the group.\u00a0 Also between\u00a0GROUP -1 and GROUP-2 there was a statistically significant difference in the reduction of pain scores (p<0.05, 95% CI). The above findings are depicted in Table 3. The\u00a0corresponding percentage improvement in pain relief from day 1 to day 3 to day 7 with movement and at rest in both the groups is shown in Figure 3a and Figure 3b respectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"Vol15No1_Com_Pri_fig3a\"<\/a><\/td>\nFigure 3a: Percentage change in the intensity of pain relief with movement in GROUP-1 and GROUP-2 as per VAS<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to view figure<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"Vol15No1_Com_Pri_fig3b\"<\/a><\/td>\nFigure 3b: Percentage change in the intensity of pain relief at rest in GROUP-1 and GROUP-2 as per VAS<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to view figure<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Table 3: Evaluation of primary efficacy endpoint (intensity of pain relief) as per VAS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Evaluation of primary efficacy endpoint (intensity of pain relief) as per VAS<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/td>\nINTENSITY OF PAIN<\/strong><\/td>\nGROUP- 1<\/strong><\/p>\n

ETORICOXIB+THIOCOLCHICOSIDE<\/strong>\u03b1<\/sup><\/strong><\/p>\n

(n=50)<\/strong><\/td>\n

GROUP- 2<\/strong><\/p>\n

THIOCOLCHICOSIDE<\/strong>\u03b1<\/sup><\/strong><\/p>\n

(n=50)<\/strong><\/td>\n

P-value*<\/strong><\/td>\n95% CI<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Baseline<\/p>\n

Day 1<\/p>\n

Mean\u00b1 SD<\/td>\n

With movement<\/td>\n7.02 \u00b1 1.22<\/td>\n7.54 \u00b1 0.84<\/td>\n0.0148<\/td>\n0.1043-0.9357<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
At Rest<\/td>\n6.04 \u00b1 1.59<\/td>\n6.44\u00a0 \u00b1 0.96<\/td>\n0.1310<\/td>\n-0.1213-0.9213<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Day 3<\/p>\n

Mean \u00b1 SD<\/td>\n

With Movement<\/td>\n5.08 \u00b1 1.47<\/td>\n5.66\u00a0 \u00b1 1.12<\/td>\n0.0288<\/td>\n0.0614-1.0986<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
At Rest<\/td>\n3.94 \u00b1 1.57<\/td>\n4.48 \u00b1 1.16<\/td>\n0.0533<\/td>\n-0.0078 -1.0878<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Day 7<\/p>\n

Mean \u00b1 SD<\/td>\n

With Movement<\/td>\n2.28 \u00b1 1.60<\/td>\n3.1 \u00b1 1.29<\/td>\n0.0058<\/td>\n0.2432 \u2013 1.3968<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
At Rest<\/td>\n1.26 \u00b1 1.32<\/td>\n1.82 \u00b11.22<\/td>\n0.0299<\/td>\n0.0556 -1.0644<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
P-value\u03b4<\/sup><\/strong><\/p>\n

(Between day 1 to day 7)<\/td>\n

With movement and at rest<\/td>\n< 0.0001<\/td>\n<0.0001<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u03b1<\/sup>Results are expressed as mean \u00b1 standard deviation(SD)<\/p>\n

*Significance (P value) obtained using an unpaired t-test<\/p>\n

\u03b4<\/sup>Significance (P value) obtained using a paired t-test<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

The mean (\u00b1 SD) VAS score with movement reduced from 7.02 \u00b1 1.22\u00a0 at baseline to 2.28 \u00b1 1.60 on day 7 in GROUP-1 and 7.54 \u00b1 0.84 at baseline to 3.1 \u00b1 1.29 on day 7 in\u00a0GROUP-2. Similarly the mean (\u00b1 SD) VAS score at rest reduced from 6.04 \u00b1 1.59 at baseline to 1.26 \u00b1 1.32 on day 7\u00a0 in GROUP-1 and 6.44 \u00b1 0.96 at baseline to 1.82 \u00b1 1.22 at rest on\u00a0day 7 in GROUP-2. However, the percentage reduction in the pain severity was greater within GROUP-1 than GROUP-2 (p<0.05, 95% CI).<\/p>\n

Secondary efficacy endpoint<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Global efficacy assessment by the patient was rated as excellent to a very good response for GROUP-1 (52%-44%) compared to GROUP-2 (46%-40%) as shown in\u00a0Figure 4a. The Global efficacy assessment by the clinician was from excellent to very good in GROUP-1 (64%-30%) which was better compared to GROUP-2 (60%-32%) as shown in\u00a0Figure 4b. The Global tolerability scores as assessed by the patient ranges from excellent to very good in both the groups but were found to be better in GROUP-2 ranging between (84%\u00a0to 14%) compared to (78% to 10%) in GROUP-1 as shown in Figure 5a. Similarly, the Global tolerability assessment done by the clinician showed a better response ranging\u00a0between excellent to very good in GROUP-2 (94% to 4%) compared to GROUP-1 (82% to 8%) as shown in Figure 5b.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"Vol15No1_Com_Pri_fig4a\"<\/a><\/td>\nFigure 4a: Global efficacy assessment by the patients<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to view figure<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"Vol15No1_Com_Pri_fig4b\"<\/a><\/td>\nFigure 4b: Global efficacy assessment by the clinician<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to view figure<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"Vol15No1_Com_Pri_fig5a\"<\/a><\/td>\nFigure 5a: Global assessment of tolerability by the patients<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to view figure<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"Vol15No1_Com_Pri_fig5b\"<\/a><\/td>\nFigure 5b: Global assessment of tolerability by the clinician<\/strong><\/p>\n

Click here to view figure<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Safety<\/strong><\/p>\n

About 24% (n=12) of the subjects had adverse events in GROUP-1 compared to 14% (n=7) in GROUP-2 as depicted in Table 4.\u00a0 A total of 19 adverse events were reported. The\u00a0commonest adverse event was gastritis complained by 7 subjects in GROUP-1 and 2 subjects in GROUP-2. Other adverse events complained in GROUP-1 were nausea (n=3), itching\u00a0(n=1), drowsiness (n=1). In GROUP-2 the adverse events reported were nausea (n=1), dizziness (n=1), drowsiness (n=2) and dyspepsia (n=1). These reported adverse events were\u00a0possibly associated to the study medications and were of mild to moderate intensity requiring not much intervention or discontinuation of the therapy.<\/p>\n

Table 4: Adverse events reported in both the study groups<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
ADVERSE EVENTS<\/strong><\/td>\nGROUP 1 (n=50)<\/strong><\/td>\nGROUP 2 (n=50)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
GASTRITIS<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
NAUSEA<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ITCHING<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
DIZZINESS<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
DROWSINESS<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
DYSPEPSIA<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
TOTAL<\/strong><\/td>\n(n=12) 24%<\/strong><\/td>\n(n=7) 14%<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Discussion<\/strong><\/p>\n

Painful muscle spasms are the most frequently encountered acute problem occurring in all age groups and are also seen in any occupation related to stress. Although it is mild and\u00a0subsides in due course of time, quick relief and easy healing with minimal adverse effects is desired to comfortably get back to the daily routine in our life.18 <\/sup>Many therapeutic\u00a0interventions have been tried for this purpose but remain unsatisfactory. Among the commonly prescribed medications worldwide, the traditional NSAIDs, newer selective COX-2 inhibiting NSAIDs, and muscle relaxants form the basis for treating muscle spasms due to their analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties.14,15<\/sup><\/p>\n

In this study, the results suggested that though both FDCs of the Etoricoxib with Thiocolchicoside and Thiocolchicoside monotherapy showed similar efficacy;\u00a0Thiocolchicoside monotherapy had fewer adverse events compared to the FDCs.<\/p>\n

In the present study, there was a higher percentage of female participants compared to male participants; though non-significant it is found in accordance with the previous study\u00a0conducted by Ajya Sah and Rudip Thapa, where female participants were 57% and male participants were 43%.3<\/sup> However, in the study conducted by Raut Asawari et al. the male\u00a0participants (82.5%) were predominant to female participants (17.5%).19<\/sup><\/p>\n

The percentage of individuals presenting with painful muscle spasms are more in the age group of 36-45yrs (28%), 46-55yrs (27%) which is similar to the study Ajya Sah and\u00a0Rudip Thapa3<\/sup> and Anil Pareek et al16<\/sup> suggesting that it is more common with increasing age (middle and elderly individuals ) due to the stress-related, work-related injuries or due to lack\u00a0of adequate physical activity.20 <\/sup>Also, this age group represents the working-age group and, long-term absenteeism from work due to the ailment is not desired.1,14 <\/sup>Hence an appropriate\u00a0and effective medication that offers quick and immediate relief has to be proposed.<\/p>\n

Though the pain reduction has been seen significantly (p<0.0001) \u00a0in both the groups, the primary efficacy endpoint which included pain scores has been reduced more in the\u00a0Etoricoxib and Thiocolchicoside group than the Thiocolchicoside monotherapy group (p<0.05). There has been no study with this combination of drugs, but studies have been\u00a0made with different combinations of NSAIDs with muscle relaxants. In the Ajya Sah and Anil Pareek studies, the efficacy of aceclofenac plus tizanidine has been better compared to\u00a0aceclofenac alone.3,16<\/sup> \u00a0In Raut Asawari et al diclofenac and thiocolchicoside reduced more pain than diclofenac alone19<\/sup> and in Sachdeva et al Aceclofenac and Thiocolchicoside reduced\u00a0more pain scores compared to Aceclofenac.20<\/sup> This shows the superiority of the FDC\u2019s over Thiocolchicoside alone due to their additive effect.<\/p>\n

In the secondary efficacy endpoint, the patient and the physician efficacy parameter was better in GROUP 1 compared to GROUP 2 showing the superiority of the combined\u00a0combination over the single muscle relaxant.18,21<\/sup><\/p>\n

But in some cases and some studies, the skeletal muscle relaxants like Tolperisone and Thiocolchicoside used alone have shown better efficacy compared to placebo, and also for\u00a0tolerability they have an upper hand compared to the NSAIDs.1,19<\/sup><\/p>\n

Though both groups are safe with very few adverse effects, in this study, adverse events were more in the combination group and more with Etoricoxib than thiocolchicoside.\u00a0Etoricoxib has more adverse effects with gastritis hence less tolerable than thiocolchicoside. Unlike other muscle relaxants, Thiocolchicoside has been reported to have less\u00a0gastrointestinal side effects and was well tolerated.23<\/sup> The extension of its pharmacological actions has been shown as the side effect of a centrally acting skeletal muscle relaxant.<\/p>\n

The limitations of the study are that the sample size is small and it is an open-label study. This can be addressed by conducting multicenter randomized control study to establish\u00a0the beneficial effect of the FDC of Etoricoxib and Thiocolchicoside in various other acute pains with muscle spasms with a larger study population.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the present study for the treatment of painful muscle spasms, the fixed-dose combination of Etoricoxib and Thiocolchicoside has shown better efficacy with faster pain\u00a0relief compared to Thiocolchicoside alone though it is more tolerable than the combination therapy.<\/p>\n

Acknowledgment<\/strong><\/p>\n

The author sincerely thanks the Orthopaedic Department for allowing to conduct the study and provide the clinical material. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.<\/p>\n

Conflicts of Interest<\/strong><\/p>\n

There are no conflicts of interest.<\/p>\n

Funding Sources<\/strong><\/p>\n

There is no funding source for this study<\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Prabhoo R, Keny S, Prabhoo T, et al. A Phase IV Observational Multi-centre, Open-Label Study on Efficacy and Safety of Tolperisone 150 mg in Patients with Painful Muscle Spasm Associated with Degenerative or Inflammatory Diseases of the Musculoskeletal System. The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India; 59: 33-37 (2011).<\/li>\n
  2. Pratzel HG, Alken RG, Ramm S. Efficacy and tolerance of repeated oral doses of tolperisone hydrochloride in the treatment of painful reflex muscle spasm: results of a prospective placebo-controlled double-blind trial. Pain; 67(2-3): 417-425 (1996).
    \nCrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  3. Sah Ajya, Thapa Rudip. Comparative Study On Efficacy Of Aceclofenac And Aceclofenac Plus Tizanidine In Patients With Low Back Pain At Nepal Medical College And Teaching Hospital. Indian Journal Medical Research and Pharmaceutical Sciences; 4(12): 39-44 (2017).<\/li>\n
  4. Witenko Corey, Moorman-Li Robin, Motycka Carol, et al. Considerations for the Appropriate Use of Skeletal Muscle Relaxants for the Management Of Acute Low Back Pain. Pharmacy and Therapeutics; 39(6): 427-435 (2014).<\/li>\n
  5. Chou R, Peterson K, Helfand M. Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Skeletal Muscle Relaxants for Spasticity and Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management; 28(2): 140-175 (2004).
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  6. Rajput JK, Patil PH, Surana SJ, et al. Analytical Methods for Determination of Muscle Relaxant Thiocolchicoside in Pharmaceutical Preparations- A Review. Open Pharmaceutical Sciences Journal; 2: 43-55 (2015).
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  7. Umarkar AR, Bavaskar SR, Yewale PN. Thiocolchicoside as Muscle Relaxant: A Review. International Journal of Pharmacy and Biological Sciences; 1(3): 364-371 (2011).<\/li>\n
  8. Soonawalla DF, Joshi N. Efficacy of thiocolchicoside in Indian patients suffering from low back pain associated with muscle spasm. Journal<\/em>of the\u00a0Indian Medical Association<\/em>; 106(5): 331-335 (2008).<\/li>\n
  9. Janbroers JM. Review of the toxicology, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of thiocolchicoside, a GABA-agonist muscle-relaxant with anti-inflammatory and analgesic actions. Acta Therapeutica; 13(3): 221-250 (1987).<\/li>\n
  10. Bashir SI, Rashid S. Randomised Comparative Study of Aceclofenac Thiocolchiside Fixed Dose Combination Against Aceclofenac Alone In Treatment Of Acute Nuchal Pain: Safety And Efficacy Assessment. International Journal Of Advances In Case Reports; 2(1): 37-40 (2015).<\/li>\n
  11. Aguzzi C, Rossi S, Bagnasco M, et al. Penetration and Distribution of Thiocolchicoside through Human Skin: Comparison Between a Commercial Foam (Miotens) and a Drug Solution. AAPS PharmSciTech; 9(4): 1185-1190 (2008).
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  12. Bonina F, Puglia C, Trombetta D, et al. Vehicle effects on in vitro skin permeation of thiocolchicoside. Pharmazie; 57(11): 750-752 (2002).<\/li>\n
  13. Patat A, Klein MJ, Surjus A, et al. Effects of acute and repeated doses of two muscle relaxants chlormezanone and thiocolchicoside, on vigilance and psychomotor performance of healthy volunteers. Human Psychopharmacology; 6: 285-292 (1991).
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  14. Roelofs PDDM, Deyo RA, Koes BW, et al. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for low back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; (1): CD000396 (2008). doi: 10.1002\/14651858.CD000396.pub3.
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  15. Brooks P, Kubler P. Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management. Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management; 2(1): 45-57 (2006).<\/li>\n
  16. Pareek A, Chandurkar N, Chandanwale AS, et al. Aceclofenac-tizanidine in the treatment of acute low back pain: a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, multicentric, comparative study against aceclofenac alone. Eur Spine J; 18: 1836-1842 (2009).
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  17. Rao R, Panghate A, Chandanwale A, et al. Clinical Comparative Study: Efficacy and Tolerability of Tolperisone and Thiocolchicoside in Acute Low Back Pain and Spinal Muscle Spasticity. Asian Spine Journal; 6(2): 115-122 (2012).
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  18. Kumar S, Rani S, Siwach R, et al. To compare the efficacy and safety of fixed dose combination of thiocolchicoside and aceclofenac versus chlorzoxazone, aceclofenac and paracetamol in patients with acute lower backache associated with muscle spasm. International Journal of Applied and Basic Medical Research; 4(2): 101-105 (2014).
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  19. Raut A, Reddy G, Patil S, et al. Comparative Efficacy Of Combined Use of Diclofenac with Thiocolchicoside and Diclofenac alone in Orthopedic Patients. International Research Journal of Pharmacy; 4(2): 164-166 (2013).<\/li>\n
  20. Nikose S, Khan S, Gudhe M, et al. Efficacy of Diclofenac versus combination of Ibuprofen and Paracetamol, in Acute Low Back Pain with Sciatica. European Journal of Pharmaceutical and Medical Research; 3(12): 487-491 (2016).<\/li>\n
  21. Desai AA, Sachdeva PD, Bhoomi D. A Comparative Study of combined use of Aceclofenac along with Thiocolchicoside and Aceclofenac alone in patients diagnosed of low back pain. An International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences; 2(2): 141-150 (2011).<\/li>\n
  22. Patel HD, Uppin RB, Naidu AR,et al. Efficacy and Safety of Combination of NSAIDs and Muscle Relaxants in the Management of Acute Low Back Pain. Pain Ther; 8: 121-132 (2019).
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n
  23. Reddy DMK, Jagarlamudi P. To compare the efficacy and safety of thiocolchicoside and chlorzoxazone in muscle spasm associated with low back pain. J. Evolution Med. Dent. Sci; 7(48): 5150-5153 (2018).
    \n    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Introduction Muscle spasms occurring in the general population are of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[97],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-43063","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-vol15no1"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43063","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=43063"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43063\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":43778,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43063\/revisions\/43778"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=43063"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=43063"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=43063"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}