Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of a Single Dose of an Amylmetacresol/2,4-dichlorobenzyl Alcohol Plus Lidocaine Lozenge or a Hexylresorcinol Lozenge for the Treatment of Acute Sore Throat Due to Upper Respiratory Tract Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sore throat is a frequent reason for seeking medical care but few prescription options are available. Lozenges are effective in delivering active ingredients to the throat. This study was conducted to determine the analgesic efficacy of two lozenges one containing amylmetacresol (AMC)/2,4-dichlorobenzyl alcohol (DCBA) and lidocaine and one containing hexylresorcinol versus placebo in patients with acute sore throat due to upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). METHODS: This was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled study. In total, 190 patients were randomised 1:1:1 to a single dose of AMC/DCBA + lidocaine, hexylresorcinol or placebo lozenge. Subjective ratings of throat soreness, difficulty swallowing, swollen throat, numbing, and sore throat relief were obtained up to 2 hours post dose. Patient and investigator global ratings and a consumer questionnaire were also collected. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in severity of throat soreness for both lozenges versus placebo at 2 hours post dose. RESULTS: The hexylresorcinol lozenge demonstrated superiority over placebo for primary and secondary efficacy variables including those related to throat soreness, sore throat relief and difficulty swallowing; the AMC/DCBA + lidocaine lozenge was also superior to placebo for secondary endpoints at various time points but did not reach significance for the primary efficacy variable. Both lozenges had a rapid onset of action from 1-10 minutes post dose for the AMC/DCBA + lidocaine lozenge and 1-5 minutes post dose for the hexylresorcinol lozenge. Numbness was reported from 1 minute post dose with the AMC/DCBA + lidocaine lozenge and was greatest at 15 minutes. Numbness was reported from 5 minutes post dose with the hexylresorcinol lozenge and was greatest at 10 minutes. Both lozenges were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Both AMC/DCBA + lidocaine and hexylresorcinol lozenges provided rapid and effective sore throat relief in patients with URTI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".