TY - JOUR
T1 - Effect of dronabinol on central neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury
T2 - A pilot study
AU - Rintala, Diana H.
AU - Fiess, Richard Neil
AU - Tan, Gabriel
AU - Holmes, Sally Ann
AU - Bruel, Brian M.
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2010 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2010/10
Y1 - 2010/10
N2 - Objective: To test the efficacy and safety of a cannabinoid, dronabinol, compared with an active control, diphenhydramine, in relieving neuropathic pain in persons with spinal cord injury. Design: A randomized, controlled, double-blind, crossover pilot study. Results: Seven adults with spinal cord injury and neuropathic pain below the level of injury participated. Two participants withdrew while receiving dronabinol, their first medication. For the remaining five participants, change in pain on a scale of 0-10 from baseline to the end of the maintenance phase did not differ significantly between the two medications (mean change, dronabinol: 0.20 ± 0.837, range = -1.00 to 1.00; diphenhydramine: -1.80 ± 2.490, range = -6.00 to 0; Wilcoxon Z = 1.63, P = 0.102). Similar results were found when the average of the two ratings during the maintenance phase was used (dronabinol: -0.20 ± 0.671, range = -0.50 to 1.00; diphenhydramine: -1.40 ± 1.245, range = -3.50 to -0.50; Wilcoxon Z = 1.60, P = 0.109). The most common side effects were dry mouth, constipation, fatigue, and drowsiness for both medications. Conclusions: On average, dronabinol was no more effective than diphenhydramine for relieving chronic neuropathic pain below the level of injury.
AB - Objective: To test the efficacy and safety of a cannabinoid, dronabinol, compared with an active control, diphenhydramine, in relieving neuropathic pain in persons with spinal cord injury. Design: A randomized, controlled, double-blind, crossover pilot study. Results: Seven adults with spinal cord injury and neuropathic pain below the level of injury participated. Two participants withdrew while receiving dronabinol, their first medication. For the remaining five participants, change in pain on a scale of 0-10 from baseline to the end of the maintenance phase did not differ significantly between the two medications (mean change, dronabinol: 0.20 ± 0.837, range = -1.00 to 1.00; diphenhydramine: -1.80 ± 2.490, range = -6.00 to 0; Wilcoxon Z = 1.63, P = 0.102). Similar results were found when the average of the two ratings during the maintenance phase was used (dronabinol: -0.20 ± 0.671, range = -0.50 to 1.00; diphenhydramine: -1.40 ± 1.245, range = -3.50 to -0.50; Wilcoxon Z = 1.60, P = 0.109). The most common side effects were dry mouth, constipation, fatigue, and drowsiness for both medications. Conclusions: On average, dronabinol was no more effective than diphenhydramine for relieving chronic neuropathic pain below the level of injury.
KW - Cannabinoid
KW - Diphenhydramine
KW - Dronabinol
KW - Neuropathic Pain
KW - Spinal Cord Injury
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957567663&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957567663&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181f1c4ec
DO - 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181f1c4ec
M3 - Article
C2 - 20855984
AN - SCOPUS:77957567663
SN - 0894-9115
VL - 89
SP - 840
EP - 848
JO - American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
JF - American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
IS - 10
ER -