Back pain. Results of a non-interventional study of using Ambenium® parenteral in routine clinical practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: to estimate efficacy, tolerability, and safety of Ambenium® parenteral [phenylbutazone sodium 400 mg and lidocaine hydrochloride 4 mg] used for treatment of patients with low back pain. Methods. A total of 100 patients with low back pain (LBP), who received a single intramuscular injection of Ambenium® parenteral, were included in the study. The follow-up period was 3 days. The change in pain severity on VAS (mm) was selected as a primary outcome measure for efficacy. The pain syndrome severity was estimated before administration of the drug (visit 1) and 4, 6, 8 and 12 h after the drug administration, as well as during visits 2 (day 2) and 3 (day 4). The McGill Pain Questionnaire, muscle syndrome index (MSI), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire pain estimates were used as the secondary diagnostic criteria. The percentage of patients with the positive response relative to baseline (the decrease in pain severity on VAS by more than 50%) was also determined. Results. The dynamics of the primary efficacy measure (pain severity on VAS) was as follows: 7.4 ± 0.92 cm (mean ± standard deviation) during visit 1, 5.6 ± 1.49 cm after 2 h, 4.6 ± 1.74 cm after 4 h, 3.0 ± 1.79 cm after 8 h; the VAS score was 2.3 ± 1.70 cm after 12 h (р<0.001). The share of patients who responded to therapy (with the decrease in pain severity on VAS by more than 50% relative to baseline) was 84% [95% CI: 75.0 – 91.0] 24 h after the first administration, 94% during visit 3 [95% CI: 87.0 – 98.0], р<0.001. The secondary efficacy criteria (muscle syndrome index and McGill Pain Questionnaire score) showed significant positive dynamics (р<0.001). No systemic adverse events were reported. Conclusion. The study showed that a single intramuscular injection of Ambenium® parenteral was an efficient, well-tolerated and safe treatment option for low back pain. Administration of a single drug dose makes it possible to ensure a significant clinical effect reflected in the pain severity decrease and restoration of the patient’s motor activity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".