Search published articles


Showing 3 results for Cough
Baclofen vs. Dextromethorphan in the treatment of coughing: a randomized clinical trial
Mosayeb Shahriar , Azam Sharafi , Abolfazl Emamdadi , Nezarali Molaie ,
Volume 67, Issue 10 (1-2010)
Abstract
Background: Cough is one of the most common symptoms for which outpatient care is sought. Since, a few research evaluated efficacy and therapeutic effect of baclofen in remedy of cough (especially chronic cough), In this study we compared the efficacy of oral Baclofen 20 mg with Dextromethorphan to improvement of cough in two groups.
Methods: In this double blind randomized clinical trial, 120 patients with chronic cough (up to three weeks) that were referred to respiratory diseases clinic of Ali Ebn-e Abitaleb (AS) hospital in Zahedan, Iran at 2007 were randomly devided to two groups. 60 peoples in each, (baclofen recipient group with mean age 32.32±6.51 and dextromethorphan recipient group with mean age 31.54±5.06 year) were evaluated for qualitative decline of severity, period and duration of cough for 14 days.
Results: In baclofen recipient group 73.3% and in dextromethorphan recipient group 65% all patients had decline of severity, period and duration of the cough. Statistically, there were no significant differences between two groups in regard to qualitative decline of severity, period and duration of cough (p>0.05). Also, there were no drug related side effects in the patients.
Conclusions: Baclofen decreased severity, period and duration of cough more than dextromethorphan. Because there were no significant differences between two groups, we needed to do more quantitative researches to compare them.

Comparison of the effects of Althaea officinalis and eucalyptus nebulizers on the severity of cough in patients with Covid-19: Clinical trial
Fatemeh Najafi, Masoumeh Amiri Delui, Maryam Moradi , Parastoo Sarkhosh, Zahra Rezaian, Farnoosh Sharifymood, Fateme Kameli ,
Volume 82, Issue 1 (3-2024)
Abstract
Background: one of the most common and important complications of COVID-19 is cough. The present study was designed with the aim of comparing the effect of althaea officinalis and eucalyptus nebulizer on the severity of cough in COVID-19 patients.
Methods: in this randomized clinical trial, from January 2022 to June 2022, 36 patients with COVID-19 were selected and randomly divided into three groups. Next, the severity of cough was recorded two hours before the intervention based on the visual analogue (VAS) in both groups until the patient was admitted to the hospital, then, one cc aqueous extract of althaea officinalis with five cc Normal Saline for the althaea officinalis group and four cc aqueous extract eucalyptus whit five cc Normal Saline for the eucalyptus group, were nebulized once a day for 15 minutes. Two hours after the intervention, the intensity of cough was again recorded in two groups. This intervention continued until the hospitalization of the patients. No intervention was done for the control group. The data was analyzed with Spss software at a significance level of less than 0.05.
Results: In this study before the intervention, there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups in terms of cough intensity (p>0.05), but after the intervention on the second and third days, there was a statistically significant difference between the three groups in terms of cough intensity. The rate of reduction in cough severity in althaea officinalis group was higher than the other two groups (p<0.05).  Also, the results of Friedman's test indicated that althaea officinalis and eucalyptus nebulizers incense improved the severity of cough in patients over time.
Conclusion: the use of althaea officinalis and eucalyptus nebulizer improved the severity of cough in patients with COVID-19, but althaea officinalis nebulizer had a greater effect on cough severity compared to eucalyptus. It is suggested to use althaea officinalis nebulizer as well as eucalyptus as a treatment method along with other treatment methods.

Comparison of the complications and results of intubation with a cuffed tracheal tube filled with alkaline lidocaine gel and filled with air in patients admitted to Baqiyatallah Al-Azam Hospital
Pourya Mashategan, Mohammad Reza Ghane , Ali Bahramifar, Mahdi Raei ,
Volume 82, Issue 6 (8-2024)
Abstract
Background: Intubation is normally conducted in an emergency or prior to surgery. A cuffed tracheal tube is fitted, whose inflated cuff exerts pressure on the tracheal wall. Such pressure should, therefore, be monitored every day by use of pressure gauge devices. The general guideline in this regard is that the pressure of the cuff must lie between 20 and 30 cm of water. The exaggerated pressure may cause tissue ischemia, wound, and necrosis of the tracheal wall; if it is too low, this could result in air leakage and oropharyngeal secretions, increasing the risk of insufficient ventilation and aspiration pneumonia. This study aimed at comparing the cuff pressure of an endotracheal tube inflated with alkaline lidocaine versus air for any post-extubation complications and cuff pressure changes.
Methods: This prospective cohort study was conducted on patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit of Baqiyatullah Al-Azam Hospital in Tehran between May 2023 and February 2024, underwent intubation in this unit and met the inclusion criteria for the study. This prospective study included 62 patients, and tracheal tube cuff pressure was recorded at 30 minutes, 60 minutes, 120 minutes, 6 hours, and 24 hours after intubation with a pressure gauge. Patients were randomly divided into two groups-an 'air group', whose cuff was inflated to the pressure of 20 cmH2O by air, and a 'lidocaine group,' whose cuff was filled with 2% lidocaine to the same pressure. In this study, the post-extubation complications, such as sore throat, hoarseness, and cough, were assessed immediately and 24 hours after extubation. Similarly, the tracheal tube displacement during the intubation process was monitored in both groups.
Results: The results showed that the pressure of an endotracheal tube cuff inflated with lidocaine was drastically lower than the one inflated with air, with a p-value of 0.001. On the other hand, the sore throat, cough, and hoarseness after extubation and 24 hours later were significantly fewer in the lidocaine group compared with the air group at a p-value of 0.001.
Conclusion: Cuffs inflated with alkalinized lidocaine clearly avoided high cuff pressure at induction and reduced postextubation sore throat. Hence, alkalinized lidocine-filled endotracheal tube cuffs are comparatively safer and more beneficial than conventional air-filled cuffs.

Page 1 from 1     

© 2025 , Tehran University of Medical Sciences, CC BY-NC 4.0

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb