-
International Journal of Molecular... Oct 2021Paracetamol is commonly used to treat fever and pain in pregnant women, but there are growing concerns that this may cause attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and... (Review)
Review
Paracetamol is commonly used to treat fever and pain in pregnant women, but there are growing concerns that this may cause attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder in the offspring. A growing number of epidemiological studies suggests that relative risks for these disorders increase by an average of about 25% following intrauterine paracetamol exposure. The data analyzed point to a dose-effect relationship but cannot fully account for unmeasured confounders, notably indication and genetic transmission. Only few experimental investigations have addressed this issue. Altered behavior has been demonstrated in offspring of paracetamol-gavaged pregnant rats, and paracetamol given at or prior to day 10 of life to newborn mice resulted in altered locomotor activity in response to a novel home environment in adulthood and blunted the analgesic effect of paracetamol given to adult animals. The molecular mechanisms that might mediate these effects are unknown. Paracetamol has diverse pharmacologic actions. It reduces prostaglandin formation via competitive inhibition of the peroxidase moiety of prostaglandin H2 synthase, while its metabolite -arachidonoyl-phenolamine activates transient vanilloid-subtype 1 receptors and interferes with cannabinoid receptor signaling. The metabolite -acetyl-p-benzo-quinone-imine, which is pivotal for liver damage after overdosing, exerts oxidative stress and depletes glutathione in the brain already at dosages below the hepatic toxicity threshold. Given the widespread use of paracetamol during pregnancy and the lack of safe alternatives, its impact on the developing brain deserves further investigation.
Topics: Adult; Animals; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Mice; Pregnancy; Rats; Acetaminophen; Animals, Newborn; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Brain; Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects
PubMed: 34681816
DOI: 10.3390/ijms222011156 -
Journal of Endodontics May 2015The purpose of this review was to discuss new issues related to safety, labeling, dosing, and a better understanding of the analgesic effect of acetaminophen. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this review was to discuss new issues related to safety, labeling, dosing, and a better understanding of the analgesic effect of acetaminophen.
METHODS
The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and PubMed databases were searched. Additionally, the bibliography of all relevant articles and textbooks were manually searched. Two reviewers independently selected the relevant articles.
RESULTS
Concerns about acetaminophen overdose and related liver failure have led the US Food and Drug Administration to mandate new labeling on acetaminophen packaging. In addition, large-scale epidemiologic studies increasingly report evidence for second-generation adverse effects of acetaminophen. Prenatal exposure to acetaminophen is associated with neurodevelopmental and behavioral disorders. Recent studies also suggest that acetaminophen is a hormone disrupter (ie, it interferes with sex and thyroid hormone function essential for normal brain development) and thus may not be considered a safe drug during pregnancy. Finally, emerging evidence suggests that although the predominant mechanism by which acetaminophen exerts its therapeutic effect is by inhibition of cyclooxygenase, multiple other mechanisms also contribute to its analgesic effect.
CONCLUSIONS
Available evidence suggests that indiscriminate usage of this drug is not warranted. and its administration to a pregnant patient should be considered with great caution.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Drug Labeling; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; United States
PubMed: 25732401
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.01.024 -
JAMA Network Open Oct 2020Acetaminophen (paracetamol) and ibuprofen are the most widely prescribed and available over-the-counter medications for management of fever and pain in children. Despite... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Acetaminophen (paracetamol) and ibuprofen are the most widely prescribed and available over-the-counter medications for management of fever and pain in children. Despite the common use of these medications, treatment recommendations for young children remain divergent.
OBJECTIVE
To compare acetaminophen with ibuprofen for the short-term treatment of fever or pain in children younger than 2 years.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic search of the databases MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the trial registers ClinicalTrials.gov and the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry from inception to March 2019, with no language limits.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies of any design that included children younger than 2 years and directly compared acetaminophen with ibuprofen, reporting antipyretic, analgesic, and/or safety outcomes were considered. There were no limits on length of follow-up.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline, 2 authors independently extracted data and assessed quality. Data were pooled using a fixed-effects method if I2 was less than 50% and using a random-effects method if I2 was 50% or greater.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcomes were fever or pain within 4 hours of treatment onset. Safety outcomes included serious adverse events, kidney impairment, gastrointestinal bleeding, hepatotoxicity, severe soft tissue infection, empyema, and asthma and/or wheeze.
RESULTS
Overall, 19 studies (11 randomized; 8 nonrandomized) of 241 138 participants from 7 countries and various health care settings (hospital-based and community-based) were included. Compared with acetaminophen, ibuprofen resulted in reduced temperature at less than 4 hours (4 studies with 435 participants; standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.08-0.67; P = .01; I2 = 49%; moderate quality evidence) and at 4 to 24 hours (5 studies with 879 participants; SMD, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.03-0.45; P = .03; I2 = 57%; moderate-quality evidence) and less pain at 4 to 24 hours (2 studies with 535 participants; SMD, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.03-0.37; P = .02; I2 = 25%; moderate-quality evidence). Adverse events were uncommon. Acetaminophen and ibuprofen appeared to have similar serious adverse event profiles (7 studies with 27 932 participants; ibuprofen vs aceteminophen: odds ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.87-1.33; P = .50, I2 = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this study, use of ibuprofen vs acetaminophen for the treatment of fever or pain in children younger than 2 years was associated with reduced temperature and less pain within the first 24 hours of treatment, with equivalent safety.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Child, Preschool; Female; Fever; Humans; Ibuprofen; Infant; Male; Pain
PubMed: 33125495
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.22398 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2018Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the most widely used non-prescription analgesic in the world. Paracetamol is commonly taken in overdose either deliberately or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the most widely used non-prescription analgesic in the world. Paracetamol is commonly taken in overdose either deliberately or unintentionally. In high-income countries, paracetamol toxicity is a common cause of acute liver injury. There are various interventions to treat paracetamol poisoning, depending on the clinical status of the person. These interventions include inhibiting the absorption of paracetamol from the gastrointestinal tract (decontamination), removal of paracetamol from the vascular system, and antidotes to prevent the formation of, or to detoxify, metabolites.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of interventions for paracetamol overdosage irrespective of the cause of the overdose.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register (January 2017), CENTRAL (2016, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to January 2017), Embase (1974 to January 2017), and Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to January 2017). We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov database (US National Institute of Health) for any ongoing or completed trials (January 2017). We examined the reference lists of relevant papers identified by the search and other published reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised clinical trials assessing benefits and harms of interventions in people who have ingested a paracetamol overdose. The interventions could have been gastric lavage, ipecacuanha, or activated charcoal, or various extracorporeal treatments, or antidotes. The interventions could have been compared with placebo, no intervention, or to each other in differing regimens.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data from the included trials. We used fixed-effect and random-effects Peto odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for analysis of the review outcomes. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool to assess the risks of bias (i.e. systematic errors leading to overestimation of benefits and underestimation of harms). We used Trial Sequential Analysis to control risks of random errors (i.e. play of chance) and GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence and constructed 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE software.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 11 randomised clinical trials (of which one acetylcysteine trial was abandoned due to low numbers recruited), assessing several different interventions in 700 participants. The variety of interventions studied included decontamination, extracorporeal measures, and antidotes to detoxify paracetamol's toxic metabolite; which included methionine, cysteamine, dimercaprol, or acetylcysteine. There were no randomised clinical trials of agents that inhibit cytochrome P-450 to decrease the activation of the toxic metabolite N-acetyl-p-benzoquinone imine.Of the 11 trials, only two had two common outcomes, and hence, we could only meta-analyse two comparisons. Each of the remaining comparisons included outcome data from one trial only and hence their results are presented as described in the trials. All trial analyses lack power to access efficacy. Furthermore, all the trials were at high risk of bias. Accordingly, the quality of evidence was low or very low for all comparisons. Interventions that prevent absorption, such as gastric lavage, ipecacuanha, or activated charcoal were compared with placebo or no intervention and with each other in one four-armed randomised clinical trial involving 60 participants with an uncertain randomisation procedure and hence very low quality. The trial presented results on lowering plasma paracetamol levels. Activated charcoal seemed to reduce the absorption of paracetamol, but the clinical benefits were unclear. Activated charcoal seemed to have the best risk:benefit ratio among gastric lavage, ipecacuanha, or supportive treatment if given within four hours of ingestion. There seemed to be no difference between gastric lavage and ipecacuanha, but gastric lavage and ipecacuanha seemed more effective than no treatment (very low quality of evidence). Extracorporeal interventions included charcoal haemoperfusion compared with conventional treatment (supportive care including gastric lavage, intravenous fluids, and fresh frozen plasma) in one trial with 16 participants. The mean cumulative amount of paracetamol removed was 1.4 g. One participant from the haemoperfusion group who had ingested 135 g of paracetamol, died. There were no deaths in the conventional treatment group. Accordingly, we found no benefit of charcoal haemoperfusion (very low quality of evidence). Acetylcysteine appeared superior to placebo and had fewer adverse effects when compared with dimercaprol or cysteamine. Acetylcysteine superiority to methionine was unproven. One small trial (low quality evidence) found that acetylcysteine may reduce mortality in people with fulminant hepatic failure (Peto OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.94). The most recent randomised clinical trials studied different acetylcysteine regimens, with the primary outcome being adverse events. It was unclear which acetylcysteine treatment protocol offered the best efficacy, as most trials were underpowered to look at this outcome. One trial showed that a modified 12-hour acetylcysteine regimen with a two-hour acetylcysteine 100 mg/kg bodyweight loading dose was associated with significantly fewer adverse reactions compared with the traditional three-bag 20.25-hour regimen (low quality of evidence). All Trial Sequential Analyses showed lack of sufficient power. Children were not included in the majority of trials. Hence, the evidence pertains only to adults.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
These results highlight the paucity of randomised clinical trials comparing different interventions for paracetamol overdose and their routes of administration and the low or very low level quality of the evidence that is available. Evidence from a single trial found activated charcoal seemed the best choice to reduce absorption of paracetamol. Acetylcysteine should be given to people at risk of toxicity including people presenting with liver failure. Further randomised clinical trials with low risk of bias and adequate number of participants are required to determine which regimen results in the fewest adverse effects with the best efficacy. Current management of paracetamol poisoning worldwide involves the administration of intravenous or oral acetylcysteine which is based mainly on observational studies. Results from these observational studies indicate that treatment with acetylcysteine seems to result in a decrease in morbidity and mortality, However, further evidence from randomised clinical trials comparing different treatments are needed.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Acetylcysteine; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Antidotes; Charcoal; Cysteamine; Dimercaprol; Drug Overdose; Gastric Lavage; Humans; Intestinal Absorption; Liver Failure, Acute; Liver Transplantation; Methionine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29473717
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003328.pub3 -
Circulation Feb 2022Acetaminophen is widely used as first-line therapy for chronic pain because of its perceived safety and the assumption that, unlike nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs,...
BACKGROUND
Acetaminophen is widely used as first-line therapy for chronic pain because of its perceived safety and the assumption that, unlike nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, it has little or no effect on blood pressure (BP). Although observational studies suggest that acetaminophen may increase BP, clinical trials are lacking. We, therefore, studied the effects of regular acetaminophen dosing on BP in individuals with hypertension.
METHODS
In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study, 110 individuals were randomized to receive 1 g acetaminophen 4× daily or matched placebo for 2 weeks followed by a 2-week washout period before crossing over to the alternate treatment. At the beginning and end of each treatment period, 24-hour ambulatory BPs were measured. The primary outcome was a comparison of the change in mean daytime systolic BP from baseline to end of treatment between the placebo and acetaminophen arms.
RESULTS
One-hundred three patients completed both arms of the study. Regular acetaminophen, compared with placebo, resulted in a significant increase in mean daytime systolic BP (132.8±10.5 to 136.5±10.1 mm Hg [acetaminophen] vs 133.9±10.3 to 132.5±9.9 mm Hg [placebo]; <0.0001) with a placebo-corrected increase of 4.7 mm Hg (95% CI, 2.9-6.6) and mean daytime diastolic BP (81.2±8.0 to 82.1±7.8 mm Hg [acetaminophen] vs 81.7±7.9 to 80.9±7.8 mm Hg [placebo]; =0.005) with a placebo-corrected increase of 1.6 mm Hg (95% CI, 0.5-2.7). Similar findings were seen for 24-hour ambulatory and clinic BPs.
CONCLUSIONS
Regular daily intake of 4 g acetaminophen increases systolic BP in individuals with hypertension by ≈5 mm Hg when compared with placebo; this increases cardiovascular risk and calls into question the safety of regular acetaminophen use in this situation. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01997112. URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu; Unique identifier: 2013-003204-40.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Blood Pressure; Cross-Over Studies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Male; Middle Aged
PubMed: 35130054
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056015 -
Nature Reviews. Endocrinology Dec 2021Paracetamol (N-acetyl-p-aminophenol (APAP), otherwise known as acetaminophen) is the active ingredient in more than 600 medications used to relieve mild to moderate pain... (Review)
Review
Paracetamol (N-acetyl-p-aminophenol (APAP), otherwise known as acetaminophen) is the active ingredient in more than 600 medications used to relieve mild to moderate pain and reduce fever. APAP is widely used by pregnant women as governmental agencies, including the FDA and EMA, have long considered APAP appropriate for use during pregnancy when used as directed. However, increasing experimental and epidemiological research suggests that prenatal exposure to APAP might alter fetal development, which could increase the risks of some neurodevelopmental, reproductive and urogenital disorders. Here we summarize this evidence and call for precautionary action through a focused research effort and by increasing awareness among health professionals and pregnant women. APAP is an important medication and alternatives for treatment of high fever and severe pain are limited. We recommend that pregnant women should be cautioned at the beginning of pregnancy to: forego APAP unless its use is medically indicated; consult with a physician or pharmacist if they are uncertain whether use is indicated and before using on a long-term basis; and minimize exposure by using the lowest effective dose for the shortest possible time. We suggest specific actions to implement these recommendations. This Consensus Statement reflects our concerns and is currently supported by 91 scientists, clinicians and public health professionals from across the globe.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Female; Fetal Development; Humans; Pregnancy
PubMed: 34556849
DOI: 10.1038/s41574-021-00553-7 -
European Journal of Pain (London,... Aug 2015Acetaminophen/paracetamol is the most widely used drug of the world. At the same time, it is probably one of the most dangerous compounds in medical use, causing... (Review)
Review
Acetaminophen/paracetamol is the most widely used drug of the world. At the same time, it is probably one of the most dangerous compounds in medical use, causing hundreds of deaths in all industrialized countries due to acute liver failure (ALF). Publications of the last 130 years found in the usual databases were analyzed. Personal contacts existed to renowned researchers having contributed to the medical use of paracetamol and its precursors as H.U. Zollinger, S. Moeschlin, U. Dubach, J. Axelrod and others. Further information is found in earlier reviews by Eichengrün, Rodnan and Benedek, Sneader, Brune; comp. references. The history of the discovery of paracetamol starts with an error (active against worms), continues with a false assumption (paracetamol is safer than phenacetin), describes the first side-effect 'epidemy' (phenacetin nephropathy, drug-induced interstitial nephritis) and ends with the discovery of second-generation problems due to the unavoidable production of a highly toxic metabolite of paracetamol N-acetyl-p-benzoquinone imine (NAPQI) that may cause not only ALF and kidney damage but also impaired development of the fetus and the newborn child. It appears timely to reassess the risk/benefit ratio of this compound.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Adult; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Child; History, 19th Century; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Humans
PubMed: 25429980
DOI: 10.1002/ejp.621 -
European Journal of Pediatrics May 2022Although widely believed by pediatricians and parents to be safe for use in infants and children when used as directed, increasing evidence indicates that early life... (Review)
Review
Although widely believed by pediatricians and parents to be safe for use in infants and children when used as directed, increasing evidence indicates that early life exposure to paracetamol (acetaminophen) may cause long-term neurodevelopmental problems. Furthermore, recent studies in animal models demonstrate that cognitive development is exquisitely sensitive to paracetamol exposure during early development. In this study, evidence for the claim that paracetamol is safe was evaluated using a systematic literature search. Publications on PubMed between 1974 and 2017 that contained the keywords "infant" and either "paracetamol" or "acetaminophen" were considered. Of those initial 3096 papers, 218 were identified that made claims that paracetamol was safe for use with infants or children. From these 218, a total of 103 papers were identified as sources of authority for the safety claim. Conclusion: A total of 52 papers contained actual experiments designed to test safety, and had a median follow-up time of 48 h. None monitored neurodevelopment. Furthermore, no trial considered total exposure to drug since birth, eliminating the possibility that the effects of drug exposure on long-term neurodevelopment could be accurately assessed. On the other hand, abundant and sufficient evidence was found to conclude that paracetamol does not induce acute liver damage in babies or children when used as directed. What is Known: • Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is widely thought by pediatricians and parents to be safe when used as directed in the pediatric population, and is the most widely used drug in that population, with more than 90% of children exposed to the drug in some reports. • Paracetamol is known to cause liver damage in adults under conditions of oxidative stress or when used in excess, but increasing evidence from studies in humans and in laboratory animals indicates that the target organ for paracetamol toxicity during early development is the brain, not the liver. What is New: • This study finds hundreds of published reports in the medical literature asserting that paracetamol is safe when used as directed, providing a foundation for the widespread belief that the drug is safe. • This study shows that paracetamol was proven to be safe by approximately 50 short-term studies demonstrating the drug's safety for the pediatric liver, but the drug was never shown to be safe for neurodevelopment. Paracetamol is widely believed to be safe for infants and children when used as directed, despite mounting evidence in humans and in laboratory animals indicating that the drug is not safe for neurodevelopment. An exhaustive search of published work cited for safe use of paracetamol in the pediatric population revealed 52 experimental studies pointing toward safety, but the median follow-up time was only 48 h, and neurodevelopment was never assessed.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Child; Humans
PubMed: 35175416
DOI: 10.1007/s00431-022-04407-w -
The Pan African Medical Journal 2020fever is the primary symptom of most childhood illnesses and a cause of concern to their caregivers. The antipyretics commonly used to treat fever are ibuprofen and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
INTRODUCTION
fever is the primary symptom of most childhood illnesses and a cause of concern to their caregivers. The antipyretics commonly used to treat fever are ibuprofen and paracetamol. Most studies on the effectiveness of ibuprofen and paracetamol in treating fever in under-fives were conducted in Europe and North America with very few in African children. This study was aimed at assessing the effectiveness and safety of a single dose therapy of ibuprofen versus paracetamol for treating childhood fever in Nigeria.
METHODS
a randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted in the University of Calabar Teaching Hospital, in Nigeria. A total of 140 eligible children aged 6-59 months with tympanic temperature of 38°C-40°C were enrolled, and 70 of them were assigned to one arm that received a single dose of ibuprofen (10mg/kg) and 70 had paracetamol (15mg/kg). After drug administration, the children were admitted and observed in the hospital for six hours during which period a half-hourly temperature measurement and monitoring for adverse events were done.
RESULTS
the overall result showed that ibuprofen had a better fever reducing effect compared to paracetamol. The proportion of afebrile children in the ibuprofen versus paracetamol group at 1.5-2.5 hours of administration of the drugs was statistically significant (p = 0.04). The adverse events of both drugs were mild and quite comparable with vomiting being the commonest.
CONCLUSION
ibuprofen is more effective in the treating fever in under-fives compared to paracetamol. The adverse events of both drugs were mild and comparable.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Antipyretics; Body Temperature; Child, Preschool; Female; Fever; Hospitals, Teaching; Humans; Ibuprofen; Infant; Male; Nigeria; Vomiting
PubMed: 33224416
DOI: 10.11604/pamj.2020.36.350.21393 -
Trials Jan 2021To compare the efficacy and safety of bioavailable turmeric extract versus paracetamol in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
To compare the efficacy and safety of bioavailable turmeric extract versus paracetamol in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).
METHODS
In this randomized, non-inferiority, controlled clinical study, patients of knee OA were randomized to receive bioavailable turmeric extract (BCM-95®) 500 mg capsule two times daily or paracetamol 650 mg tablet three times daily for 6 weeks. The primary outcome measure was Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale. The secondary outcome measures were WOMAC total, WOMAC stiffness, and WOMAC physical function scores. Responder analysis of individual patients at different levels (≥ 20%, ≥ 50%, and ≥ 70%) for WOMAC score was calculated. TNF alpha and CRP levels were evaluated and adverse events (AE) were also recorded.
RESULTS
Seventy-one and seventy-three knee OA patients, respectively in bioavailable turmeric extract and paracetamol groups, completed the study. Non-inferiority (equivalence) test showed that WOMAC scores were equivalent in both the groups (p value < 0.05) in all the domains within the equivalence limit defined by effect size (Cohen's d) of 0.5 whereas CRP and TNF-α were better reduced with turmeric extract than paracetamol. After 6 weeks of treatment, WOMAC total score, pain, stiffness, and function scores got a significant improvement of 23.59, 32.09, 28.5, and 20.25% respectively with turmeric extract. In the turmeric extract group, 18% of patients got more than 50% improvement and 3% of patients got more than 70% improvement in WOMAC pain and function/stiffness score and none of the patients in the paracetamol group met the criteria. CRP and TNF-α got significantly reduced (37.21 and 74.81% respectively) in the turmeric extract group. Adverse events reported were mild and comparatively less in the turmeric extract group (5.48%) than in the paracetamol group (12.68%).
CONCLUSION
The results of the study suggest that bioavailable turmeric extract is as effective as paracetamol in reducing pain and other symptoms of knee osteoarthritis and found to be safe and more effective in reducing CRP and TNF-α.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Clinical Trials Registry - India CTRI/2017/02/007962 . Registered on 27 February 2017.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Adult; Curcuma; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; India; Male; Middle Aged; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain Measurement; Plant Extracts; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33516238
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05053-7