Witek T J, Canestrari D A, Miller R D, Yang J Y, Riker D K
Procter & Gamble Company, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1995 May;74(5):419-26.
While first generation H1-receptor antagonists are widely used, there are relatively few data describing their comparative effects on subjective daytime sleepiness and psychomotor performance.
To compare the effects of first generation H1 receptor antagonists on subjective daytime sleepiness and psychomotor performance.
We conducted two single-dose, cross-over studies. In the first, we validated our methodology in 18 healthy subjects by examining the response to diphenhydramine (50 mg), terfenadine (60 mg), and placebo. In the second trial, we evaluated the relative effects following diphenhydramine (50 mg), diphenhydramine (25 mg), chlorpheniramine (4 mg), and placebo. Psychomotor tests included choice reaction time, hand steadiness, and a test that divided attention between tracking and reaction time. Introspective drowsiness was measured using a visual analog scale and the Stanford Sleepiness Scale. Assessments were made prior to dosing and at one, three, and five hours after dosing; a 7-hour post-drug assessment was included in the second trial.
In the first trial, 50 mg diphenhydramine produced significant impairment relative to placebo in both subjective and objective assessments (P < .05). Responses following terfenadine did not differ from placebo. In the second study, all three regimens produced subjective and objective soporific effects to a significantly greater degree than placebo. For example, significant introspective sleepiness was noted three hours following all three regimens (P < .05) and slower choice reaction times were noted one and three hours after dosing (P < .05). The general rank order of effects was diphenhydramine (50 mg), followed by diphenhydramine (25 mg), followed by chlorpheniramine (4 mg). Significant differences among the three regimens were, for the most part, confined to greater soporific effects from diphenhydramine relative to chlorpheniramine (P < .05).
Taken together, our observations confirm that subjective and objective measures of sleepiness and psychomotor performance occur following single doses of diphenhydramine and chlorpheniramine, but not terfenadine. Differences in soporific effects do exist among regimens of first-generation compounds.
虽然第一代H1受体拮抗剂被广泛使用,但描述它们对主观日间嗜睡和精神运动表现的比较效果的数据相对较少。
比较第一代H1受体拮抗剂对主观日间嗜睡和精神运动表现的影响。
我们进行了两项单剂量交叉研究。在第一项研究中,我们通过检测18名健康受试者对苯海拉明(50毫克)、特非那定(60毫克)和安慰剂的反应来验证我们的方法。在第二项试验中,我们评估了苯海拉明(50毫克)、苯海拉明(25毫克)、氯苯那敏(4毫克)和安慰剂后的相对效果。精神运动测试包括选择反应时间、手部稳定性以及一项在跟踪和反应时间之间分配注意力的测试。使用视觉模拟量表和斯坦福嗜睡量表测量内省性嗜睡。在给药前以及给药后1小时、3小时和5小时进行评估;第二项试验包括给药后7小时的评估。
在第一项试验中,与安慰剂相比,50毫克苯海拉明在主观和客观评估中均产生了显著损害(P < 0.05)。特非那定后的反应与安慰剂无差异。在第二项研究中,所有三种方案产生的主观和客观催眠效果均显著大于安慰剂。例如,在所有三种方案给药后3小时均观察到显著的内省性嗜睡(P < 0.05),给药后1小时和3小时观察到选择反应时间变慢(P < 0.05)。效果的总体排序为苯海拉明(50毫克),其次是苯海拉明(25毫克),然后是氯苯那敏(4毫克)。三种方案之间的显著差异在很大程度上局限于苯海拉明相对于氯苯那敏具有更大的催眠效果(P < 0.05)。
综合来看,我们的观察结果证实,单次服用苯海拉明和氯苯那敏后会出现嗜睡和精神运动表现的主观和客观指标变化,但特非那定不会。第一代化合物的不同方案在催眠效果上确实存在差异。