Björnsdóttir Ingunn, Einarson Thomas Ray, Gudmundsson Lárus Steinpór, Einarsdóttir Rannveig Alma
Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Section for Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Pharm World Sci. 2007 Dec;29(6):577-83. doi: 10.1007/s11096-007-9122-2. Epub 2007 May 8.
To determine the efficacy of diphenhydramine against cough due to respiratory infection or irritation in patients/subjects without comorbidities.
Two reviewers independently identified English language studies, searching on: clinical trials, randomized, diphenhydramine (OR dimenhydrinate), antitussive agents, cough (combine using AND). Sources were: Medline (1966-2005), Embase (1980-2005), Cochrane and references from retrieved articles. Two other reviewers, blinded to study origin selected studies, inclusion criteria being: diphenhydramine monotherapy against placebo, double-blinded, randomized, clinical trial, intention-to-treat, dropout information. The blinded reviewers evaluated the selected studies on a quality scale.
Eleven articles were identified, 7 were rejected (4 not placebo controlled, 2 had no diphenhydramine, 1 not blinded), leaving 4 articles, that were included in the evaluation and scored 20, 21, 25 and 26 out of a maximum of 32. In these selected studies, a total of 162 people were examined, 65 on diphenhydramine, 63 on placebo and 34 in a crossover setting. There was a total of 13 dropouts. The crossover studies demonstrated significant effect; 27-56% reduction in 20 healthy volunteers and 21-26% reduction in 13 patients (originally 14, one outlier left out), whereas the active versus placebo studies did not.
In spite of the 60 years that the substance has been on the market, only few studies have properly evaluated the effect of diphenhydramine against cough. Presumptions about efficacy of diphenhydramine against cough in humans are not univocally substantiated in literature.
确定苯海拉明对无合并症患者因呼吸道感染或刺激引起咳嗽的疗效。
两名综述员独立检索英文研究,检索词为:临床试验、随机、苯海拉明(或茶苯海明)、镇咳药、咳嗽(使用“与”进行组合)。检索来源包括:医学索引数据库(1966 - 2005年)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(1980 - 2005年)、考克兰图书馆以及检索到文章的参考文献。另外两名综述员在对研究来源不知情的情况下筛选研究,纳入标准为:苯海拉明单药治疗与安慰剂对照、双盲、随机、临床试验、意向性分析、失访信息。这两名不知情的综述员对入选研究进行质量评分。
共识别出11篇文章,7篇被排除(4篇无安慰剂对照,2篇未使用苯海拉明,1篇未设盲),剩余4篇文章纳入评估,满分32分,这4篇文章的得分分别为20分、21分、25分和26分。在这些入选研究中,共检查了162人,65人使用苯海拉明,63人使用安慰剂,34人处于交叉试验组。共有13人失访。交叉试验显示出显著效果;20名健康志愿者咳嗽减少27% - 56%,13名患者(最初14名,排除1名异常值)咳嗽减少21% - 26%,而活性药物与安慰剂对照研究未显示出显著效果。
尽管该药物已上市60年,但仅有少数研究对苯海拉明治疗咳嗽的效果进行了恰当评估。关于苯海拉明对人类咳嗽疗效的推测在文献中并未得到明确证实。