METHODS: Thirty-two Sprague-Dawley male rats were randomly allocated into four groups (n=8): control, diabetes mellitus (DM) rats and diabetic rats treated with ifenprodil at a lower dose (0.5 μg/day) (I 0.5) or higher dose (1.0 μg/day) (I 1.0). DM was induced by a single injection of streptozotocin at 60 mg/kg on day 0 of experimentation. Diabetic status was assessed on day 3 of the experimentation. The responses on both tactile and thermal stimuli were assessed on day 0 (baseline), day 14 (pre-intervention), and day 22 (post-intervention). Ifenprodil was given intrathecally for 7 days from day 15 until day 21. On day 23, 5% formalin was injected into the rats' hind paw and the nociceptive responses were recorded for 1 hour. The rats were sacrificed 72 hours post-formalin injection and an analysis of the spinal NR2B expression was performed.

RESULTS: DM rats showed a significant reduction in pain threshold in response to the tactile and thermal stimuli and higher nociceptive response during the formalin test accompanied by the higher expression of phosphorylated spinal NR2B in both sides of the spinal cord. Ifenprodil treatment for both doses showed anti-allodynic and anti-nociceptive effects with lower expression of phosphorylated and total spinal NR2B.

METHODS: The cold pressor pain responses of 148 opioid dependent patients receiving MMT were evaluated using the cold pressor test (CPT). DNA was extracted from whole blood and subjected to polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-genotyping.

RESULTS: Of the 148 subjects, 77 (52.0%) were carriers of CYP2B6*6 allele. CYP2B6*6 allele carriers had shorter cold pain threshold and pain tolerance times than non-carriers of CYP2B6*6 allele (21.05s vs 33.69s, p=0.036 and 27.15s vs 44.51s, p=0.020, respectively). Pain intensity scores of the CYP2B6*6 allele carriers was 67.55, whereas that of the CYP2B6*6 allele non-carriers was 64.86 (p=0.352).

METHODS: We recruited 33 (age range from 21 to 72 years) adult patients with a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 and above, who were scheduled for non-cardiac surgeries. Intravenous oxycodone was administered after induction of general anesthesia and blood samples were collected up to 24 h after oxycodone administration. Plasma concentrations of oxycodone were assayed using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and 253 concentration-time points were used for pharmacokinetic analysis using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling.

RESULTS: Intravenous oxycodone pharmacokinetics were well described by a two-compartment open model. The estimated total clearance and central volume of distribution of oxycodone are 28.5 l/h per 70 kg and 56.4 l per 70 kg, respectively. Total body weight was identified as a significant covariate of the clearance and central volume of distribution. Dosing simulations based on the final model demonstrate that a starting dose of 0.10 mg/kg of intravenous oxycodone is adequate to achieve a target plasma concentration and repeated doses of 0.02 mg/kg may be administered at 1.5-h intervals to maintain a plasma concentration within an effective analgesic range.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial involved treatment-naïve H. pylori-positive patients. Ninety patients received standard triple therapy for 2 weeks before receiving either a probiotic or placebo for 4 weeks. The posttreatment eradication rate was assessed via a 14 C urea breath test in Week 8. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) questionnaire and an interview on treatment adverse effects were conducted during this study.

RESULTS: The eradication rate was higher in the probiotic group than in the placebo group, with a 22.2% difference in the intention-to-treat analysis (91.1% vs. 68.9%; p = 0.007) and 24.3% difference in the per-protocol analysis (93.2% vs. 68.9%; p = 0.007). The probiotic group showed significant pre- to post-treatment reductions in indigestion, constipation, abdominal pain, and total GSRS scores. The probiotic group showed significantly greater reductions in GSRS scores than the placebo group: indigestion (4.34 ± 5.00 vs. 1.78 ± 5.64; p = 0.026), abdominal pain (2.64 ± 2.88 vs. 0.89 ± 3.11; p = 0.007), constipation (2.34 ± 3.91 vs. 0.64 ± 2.92; p = 0.023), and total score (12.41 ± 12.19 vs. 4.24 ± 13.72; p = 0.004). The probiotic group reported significantly fewer adverse headache (0% vs. 15.6%; p = 0.012) and abdominal pain (0% vs. 13.3%; p = 0.026) effects.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Faculty of Dentistry, Melaka-Manipal Medical College among 3(rd) and 4(th) year BDS students. A total of 145 dental students, who consented, participate in the study. Students were divided into 14 groups. Nine online sessions followed by nine face-to-face discussions were held. Each session addressed topics related to oral lesions and orofacial pain with pharmacological applications. After each week, students were asked to reflect on blended learning. On completion of 9 weeks, reflections were collected and analyzed.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Qualitative analysis was done using thematic analysis model suggested by Braun and Clarke.

RESULTS: The four main themes were identified, namely, merits of blended learning, skill in writing prescription for oral diseases, dosages of drugs, and identification of strengths and weakness. In general, the participants had a positive feedback regarding blended learning. Students felt more confident in drug selection and prescription writing. They could recollect the doses better after the online and face-to-face sessions. Most interestingly, the students reflected that they are able to identify their strength and weakness after the blended learning sessions.