A Comparison of Effectiveness of Oral Sucrolfate, Alginate and Hydrotalcide in Dispeptic Pain Treatment
Condition: Dyspepsia
MeSH terms: Dyspepsia
Study type: Interventional
Phase: Phase 4

Summary: 
      Dyspepsia is a very common but non-specific complaint that may indicate a group of symptoms
      that can be attributed to the upper gastrointestinal system, such as epigastric discomfort,
      abdominal bloating or fullness, stomach upset and nausea or vomiting that may be associated
      with food.

      This study aimed to improve treatment management of patients with complaints of dyspeptic
      pain and emergency services, and to compare treatment efficacy of oral sucralfate, alginate
      and hydrotalcite, which are widely used in our country. Literature According to our research,
      our study is the first study to compare different antacids in our study of emergency serviste
      dyspepsia.
    

Detailed description: 
      This study was performed prospectively, randomly, controlled, double-blind to compare the
      efficacy of oral sucralfate, alginate and hydrotalcite in patients presenting with emergency
      department dyspeptic complaints at Pamukkale University Medical Faculty Hospital Emergency
      Medicine Department.

      Patients who were referred to the emergency department with stomach ache or dyspeptic
      complaints were taken to the study. Treatment medicines were applied according to the
      randomization scheme of the study patients.

      This study was carried out in Pamukkale University Faculty of Medicine Emergency Medicine
      Department during 8 months between 01.03.2016 and 30.10.2016. Approximately 98,000 adult
      patients / year in the emergency department have a research assistant and / or faculty member
      who will check the research as a 24-hour primer. This study included 300 cases between 18 and
      60 years of age who were admitted to our emergency department with dispeptic complaints,
      agreed to participate in the study, informed consent, and met inclusion criteria. The
      criteria for receiving and not receiving work were specified at the beginning of the study.

      When appropriate patients were admitted to the study, the patient was taken to the emergency
      monitoring monitor and monitored once the written consent was obtained. Patients were
      assigned to one of the study groups according to the study number, according to the
      randomization scheme prepared by a non-emergency service computer. The numbers for the
      previously numbered workgroups were kept in unmarked envelopes and the envelope was opened by
      the study nurse to prepare the study medicine. The study medicines were prepared by an
      independent person who did not participate in the study or by the responsible work nurse who
      was at the helpline and was given to the patient by the other nurse. For each group, the
      drugs prepared in a 10 cc syringe were wrapped around the syringe with a color patch that did
      not show any similarity. When the medication was given to the patient, the patient's nose was
      closed and the drug smell was not taken. Patients were observed for 30 minutes in the
      emergency department and 30-minute VAS (Visual Analog Scale) score 5 and above were given to
      the patient for rescue treatment.

      The information and data of the patients were collected by questionnaire. In the first part
      of the questionnaire, patients' demographic information address, telephone numbers, medical
      backgrounds, medications and vital findings were recorded. Detailed physical examinations of
      all patients were evaluated by emergency physician. Patients diagnosed with dyspepsia other
      than dyspepsia such as acute coronary syndrome, pancreatitis, cholecystitis, acute abdomen,
      ileus, malignancy and gastroenteritis were excluded as a result of history and physical
      examination. Patients who did not give their consent to participate were also excluded from
      the study. The patient with unexplained dyspepsia was directed to the gastroenterology
      polyclinic for endoscopy with necessary information. After discharge, patients were asked
      whether they had recurring epigastric pain within 24 hours.
    

Intervention name(s): Alginate; Sucralfate; Hydrotalcite
Intervention type(s): Drug; Drug; Drug
Intervention description(s): 10 cc of Alginate peroral; 10 cc of Sucralfate peroral; 10 cc of Hydrotalcite peroral
Other intervention name(s): Gaviscon Lipuid; Antepsin Suspension; Talcid Suspension
Intervention MeSH terms: Sucralfate; Hydrotalcite
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention model: Factorial Assignment
Masking: Triple (Participant, Care Provider, Investigator)
Primary purpose: Treatment
Keywords: Dyspepsia; Emergency Department; Antacid; Viscous Lidocaine