紫外线灯照射强度与累计使用时间的相关性研究

目的 观察研究紫外线灯照射强度与累计使用时间的相关性.方法 随机抽取全院正在使用中的紫外线灯管136支,在标准状态下测量,分别记录每只灯管的累计使用时间及强度,将累计使用时间及照射强度进行相关性分析.并将累计使用时间大于1 000 h的61只灯管设为试验组,然后随机选取累计使用时间小于1 000 h的75只灯管为对照组.结果 紫外线灯的照射强度与累计照射时间的秩相关系数r=-0.135 6,tr=-1.584 1,P＞0.05,故紫外线灯的照射强度与累计照射时间的秩相关系数无统计学意义.试验组与对照组的平均累计时间差异有统计学意义(t=17.814,P＜0.001),试验组的累计使用时间明显长于对照组,两组资料具有可比性.两组平均照射强度及合格率比较差异无统计学意义(t=1.263,P＞0.05;x2=0.19,P＞0.05),不能说明两组灯管照射强度及合格率有差别.结论 紫外线灯的照射强度与累计照射时间之间无相关关系.紫外线灯管累计使用时间,不应作为更换灯管的依据.标准状态下测量强度作为判断合格的标准,现场测量强度作为筛查,并作为决定照射时间长短的依据.     

紫外线灯管辐照强度监测方法及使用寿命的临床研究

目的探讨紫外线灯管的使用寿命及更换灯管依据,以保证紫外线灯管辐照强度监测的准确性。方法采用移动式紫外线强度监测柜对40w和20w的紫外线灯管进行辐照强度监测作为实验组I和实验组Ⅱ,采用实地拉杆式垂直监测和生物安全柜内垂直监测的数据作为对照组I和对照组Ⅱ,比较两种监测方法紫外线灯管辐照强度变化;将正在使用中的紫外线灯管,累计使用时间〉1000h的设为实验组Ⅲ,累计使用时间〈1000h的设为对照组Ⅲ,在标准状态下并在紫外线强度监测柜中检测,分别记录每只灯管的累计使用时间及辐照强度和合格率;选取同一房间的所有紫外线灯管都〉1000h且无更换记录的作为实验组IV,〈1000h且无更换记录的房间为对照组Ⅳ,进行紫外线消毒前后空气采样,分别记录检测的细菌菌落总数,观察两组灯管紫外线消毒效果。结果实验组I、Ⅱ、Ⅲ组辐照强度与对照组I、Ⅱ、Ⅲ组比较差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;两组灯管合格率比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;实验组Ⅳ紫外线消毒后细菌平均杀灭率为86．4％,对照组Ⅳ的平均杀灭率为85．7％,两组比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论使用紫外线强度监测柜监测紫外线辐照强度准确、实用。不能将累计使用时间〉1000h作为判断紫外线灯管的使用寿命而更换灯管的依据,应定期监测紫外线灯管的辐照强度,不合格者作为更换灯管的依据。     

紫外线灯照射强度调查

测定医院用紫外线灯管的照射强度。在719支灯管中,合格者仅262支,其合格率随使用时间的延长而下降。石英玻璃灯管较高硼玻璃灯管的合格率为高。     

多功能紫外线强度指示卡支架的制作与应用

目的设计一种多功能紫外线强度指示卡支架,并了解其实际应用的效果。方法在自行研制多功能紫外线强度指示卡支架的基础上,将240支不同类型的紫外线灯管分为观察组和对照组各120支,观察组使用"多功能紫外线强度指示卡支架"检测紫外线灯管的照射强度,对照组则使用"放置紫外线强度指示卡的挂架",采用Ridit分析法比较两种工具的使用效果。结果不论是用于检测悬吊式、立式还是台式紫外线灯管的照射强度,操作人员对指示卡支架的使用满意度均优于指示卡挂架,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05或P0.01)。结论在进行紫外线灯管照射强度检测时,使用"多功能紫外线强度指示卡支架"稳妥、安全,特别是用于测定移动式、台式紫外线灯管时,起到了指示卡挂架难以起到的作用。     

比较不同方法监测紫外线消毒效果

紫外线灯的杀菌力取决于紫外线的输出强度,当低于70 μW/cm2时,需要更换灯管.笔者从事紫外线监测13年,先后使用过紫外线灯管照射时间累积法、紫外线灯管照射强度检测、紫外线强度指示卡监测法、生物监测等不同方法进行紫外线消毒效果监测.     

辐射强度不合格的紫外线灯管杀菌效果的实验观察

为了解辐射强度降低的紫外线灯管再利用价值,采用紫外线辐射强度计和细菌检测方法进行了试验观察。结果,辐射强度50~70μW/cm2的30 W紫外线灯管,在0.5 m处测得辐照强度为106μW/cm2;40 W紫外线灯管测得平均辐射强度为114μW/cm2。此类紫外线灯管对操作台近距离(0.5 m)照射消毒,30 W灯管分别照射30m in,对三类环境物体表面消毒合格率为90%,照射60 m in合格率达到100%;40 W灯管照射30 m in,消毒合格率达到100%。结论,不合格灯管具有再利用价值。     

非AIHA直接抗人球蛋白试验阳性患者输注洗涤红细胞的临床实验观察

目的 探索非AIHA（自身免疫性溶血性贫血）直接抗人球蛋白试验阳性患者输注洗涤红细胞临床实验疗效。方法 收集49例临床上直接抗人球蛋白试验阳性的非AIHA患者为实验组,对照组为35例直接抗人球蛋白试验阴性的常规输血患者,对两组所有患者输血前l小时和输血后24小时的血红蛋白（Hb）、总胆红素（TBIL）、直接胆红素（DBIL）、尿胆原和尿胆红素几项指标进行检测。结果 实验组患者输注洗涤红细胞前后,血中TBIL（t=3．76,P〈0．01）,DBIL（t=4．18,P〈0．01）,Hb（t=8．69,P〈0．01）,差异均有显著性,尿中尿胆原（x^2=3．094,P〉0．05）和尿胆红素（x^2=2．001,P〉0．05）在输血前后无显著性差异;对照组患者输注洗涤红细胞前后除了Hb（t=4．252,P〈0．01）外,其余TBIL、DBIL、尿胆原和尿胆红素的含量均无显著性变化;实验组和对照组之间,输注洗涤红细胞前,两组患者Hb（t=0．174,P〉0．05）、TBIL（t=0．26,P〉0．05）、DBIL（t=1．58,P〉0．05）差异均无显著性,而输注洗涤红细胞治疗后,两组患者除了Hb（t=0．286,P〉0．05）外,其TBIL（t=2．30,P〈0．05）和DBIL（t=2．08,P〈0．05）差异均有显著性。结论 非AIHA直接抗人球蛋白试验阳性患者输注洗涤红细胞能提高血红蛋白,但红细胞有加速破坏的倾向,增加患者肝脏转化功能的负担,故应尽量不输洗涤红细胞。     

20W紫外线消毒灯临床使用情况监测

目的了解20 W功率普通直管紫外线消毒灯的性能,为医疗机构使用20 W紫外线消毒灯提供参考。方法测量20支20 W紫外线新灯管强度,计算新灯管合格率。对医院临床科室使用中的45支20 W紫外线消毒灯每隔90 h测定辐照度,计算平均每小时辐照度衰减数值和使用寿命。利用杀菌试验观察临界值20 W紫外线灯的杀菌效果。结果 20 W新灯管平均辐照度为75.01μW/cm2,合格率为90%。临床使用的45支20 W紫外线灯的平均每小时辐照度衰减数值为0.0179μW/cm2,使用寿命1 463 h。强度为临界值的20 W紫外线灯管完全杀灭1.2×107cfu/皿的金黄色葡萄球菌需要43 min。结论对20W紫外线灯管应每半年进行强度测量,使用1 000 h后,增加测量频率,辐照度低于48.8μW/cm2时应更换新管。     

小剂量红霉素治疗支原体肺炎临床评价

目的观察小剂量红霉素治疗肺炎支原体肺炎的临床效果。方法将我科收治的肺炎支原体肺炎随机分成小剂量组和常规剂量组,每天分别予小剂量（10mg／kg）和常规剂量（30mg／kg）注射用乳糖酸红霉素治疗,10d为一疗程,对两组的临床表现、医技检查结果及不良反应进行对比分析。结果两组发热消退时间（t=1．0642,P〉0．05）、咳嗽缓解时间（t=0．8451,P〉0．05）、哕音消失时间（t=0．6721,P〉0．05）、血白细胞恢复时间（t=0．8723,P〉0．05）及治疗10d后X线胸片阴影消散率（χ2=2．085,P〉0．05）等方面比较差异无统计学意义;两组穿刺局部疼痛率比较差异无统计学意义（χ2=2．040,P〉0．05）,但恶心（χ2=33．38,P〈0．05）、呕吐（χ2=52．23,P〈0．05）、食欲缺乏（χ2=54．37,P〈0．05）等胃肠道症状比较差异均有统计学意义;2周后复查丙氨酸转氨酶差异也有统计学意义（χ2=78．13,P〈0．05）。结论小剂量红霉素治疗肺炎支原体肺炎效果肯定,不良反应少。     

动脉压迫止血器在桡动脉置管穿刺点渗血时的应用

目的探讨动脉压迫止血器在桡动脉置管护理中穿刺点渗血时止血的安全性和有效性。方法选择接受桡动脉穿刺置管术后行动脉内压力监测伴有穿刺点渗血的患者32例,按照入室时问顺序采用数字随机法进行分组,分为对照组和试验组各16例,对照组采用传统的方法,使用无菌纱布压迫,并用弹性绷带进行加压包扎;试验组采用止血器压迫止血,观察止血效果,并观察患者有无不适及并发症。结果每天换药次数的比较,试验组明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义（t=7．6,P〈0．05）;意外拔管例数的比较试验组明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义（x2=5．9,P〈0．05）;平均置管日的比较,试验组与对照组之间差异不显著,无统计学意义（t=2．0,P〉0．05）。结论桡动脉置管术后行动脉内压力监测,穿刺点渗血时采用动脉压迫止血器止血的效果好,并发症少,患者舒适度高,值得临床推广使用。     

低强度紫外线对表面消毒效果的观察

<正> 紫外线消毒因具有较多优点而应用日益广泛。为使消毒效果更加可靠,一些从事紫外线消毒研究的人员曾制定了紫外线灯管强度合格的最低标准,但众说不一,有的定在30μW/cm~2,有的定在50μW/cm~2,有的为     

脉冲电磁场对小鼠骨髓间充质干细胞增殖的影响

背景:脉冲电磁场作为一种非侵入性疗法治疗骨不连及其他的骨科疾病已被证实有确切的临床疗效。但由于认识的局限性,骨髓间充质干细胞在脉冲电磁场治疗骨折中的作用未被充分重视。目的:观察小鼠骨髓间充质干细胞在50Hz、正弦波形、不同强度、不同作用时间脉冲电磁场干预下的增殖情况,以及其细胞周期变化,以寻求最佳干预窗口。设计:单一样本、区组设计,观察对比体外细胞培养实验。单位:华中科技大学同济医学院附属普爱医院骨科。材料:选用BALB/C小鼠20只,鼠龄4～5周,体质量18～22g,雌雄不拘,由同济医学院实验动物中心提供。此动物实验符合动物伦理学要求。脉冲电磁场发生器(海军工程大学电机系设计与制造)。方法:实验于2005-02/12在华中科技大学同济医学院附属普爱医院骨外科实验室完成。用密度梯度离心法分离小鼠骨髓间充质干细胞,再用贴壁筛选法筛选,对生长良好的第3代的小鼠骨髓间充质干细胞分别给予50Hz、强度分别为4,3,2,1mT的正弦波形脉冲电磁场,2次/d,每次30min,间隔12h,以不加电磁场干预的干细胞为对照组。主要观察指标:在照射第24,48,72h后采用MTT法测定骨髓间充质干细胞增殖水平;采用流式细胞仪分析细胞周期,以增殖指数(prolifera-tionindex,PI)表示脉冲电磁场对小鼠骨髓间充质干细胞分裂增殖的影响。结果:脉冲电磁场对小鼠骨髓间充质干细胞增殖的影响:脉冲电磁场照射24,48h后各干预组与对照组比较,差异无显著性意义(P>0.05)。脉冲电磁场照射72h后各干预组骨髓间充质干细胞增殖数目多于对照组,差异有显著性意义(P<0.05～0.01),其中以1mT强度照射最为明显(P<0.01)。脉冲电磁场对小鼠骨髓间充质干细胞细胞周期的影响:在检测的所有细胞样本中均未发现有DNA倍体异常的细胞(diploid:100%)。骨髓间充质干细胞经过72h的强度为1,2,3,4mT的脉冲电磁场干预后PI值高于对照组,差异有显著性意义(P<0.05～0.01),其中以1mT最为明显(P<0.01)。结论:50Hz、正弦波形、强度为1mT的脉冲电磁场照射72h能明显促进体外小鼠骨髓间充质干细胞增殖,是最佳干预窗口。     

间充质干细胞对小鼠辐射早期造血组织细胞的细胞周期及凋亡的影响

本研究探讨骨髓间充质干细胞(MSC)对急性放射病小鼠重要造血免疫器官的早期辐射防护作用及其机制。BALB/c小鼠受5.5Gy60Coγ射线照射后随机分为两组。MSC组照射后1小时内,经尾静脉输注BALB/c小鼠的MSC2.5×107/kg;对照组在照射后输注等体积生理盐水。用流式细胞术检测两组小鼠照射后6、12、24和72小时的骨髓、胸腺和脾细胞的凋亡及细胞周期变化;用免疫组织化学法检测照射后12小时胸腺和脾脏P53蛋白表达情况。结果显示:照射后6小时各器官细胞出现G0/G1及G2/M期阻滞,S期下降。胸腺细胞,脾细胞和骨髓细胞分别于照射后12、6和24小时后发现G0/G1期阻滞峰值,随后G0/G1期细胞减少,S和G2/M期细胞增多,72小时时G0/G1期细胞数低于正常值,S期细胞数高于正常值。胸腺和脾细胞周期改变快于骨髓细胞,改变幅度也大于骨髓细胞。MSC组细胞周期变化速度和程度高于对照组。流式细胞术显示各器官细胞照射后6小时凋亡率明显增加,12小时达高峰,24小时后逐渐降到正常,脾与胸腺细胞凋亡率高于骨髓细胞。MSC组的胸腺细胞照射后12小时、脾细胞照射后12、24小时、骨髓细胞照射后24小时的凋亡率均少于对照组。免疫组织化学检测显示,照射后12小时MSC组小鼠脾脏胸腺细胞P53蛋白表达低于对照组。结论:MSC加快辐射小鼠骨髓、胸腺和脾脏细胞的周期变化,减少细胞凋亡,促进受损的造血和免疫器官修复,从而对受照小鼠起到早期辐射保护作用。     

Effects of combination treatment with ketoprofen 100 mg + acetaminophen 1000 mg on postoperative dental pain: A single-dose, 10-hour,randomized, double-blind,active- and placebo-controlled clinical trial

Background: A combination of analgesic drugs with different pharmacologic properties may be more effective, with fewer adverse events, than either agent used alone.Objective: This study assessed whether the combination of acetaminophen and ketoprofen is more effective and better tolerated than either drug used alone in treating postoperative pain.Methods: This single-dose randomized, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled study was conducted at the Finnish Student Health Service, Oulu, Finland. Patients aged 18 to 40 years with moderate or severe pain (≥3 on a numerical rating scale [NRS] of 0-10) after surgical removal of impacted third molars were randomly assigned to receive one of the following drugs in single oral doses: ketoprofen 100 mg + acetaminophen 1000 mg, ketoprofen 100 mg, acetaminophen 1000 mg, or placebo tablets. Effectiveness was assessed by the onset of analgesia, pain intensity difference (PID) from baseline, sum of PID (SPID), and duration of analgesic effect. Patients rated pain intensity on the NRS at rest and on dry swallowing. Onset of pain relief was measured using time to PID in ≥1 category at rest or on dry swallowing (PID ≥1). Patients recorded the occurrence of adverse events and the supplemental consumption of rescue medication (ibuprofen).Results: The study included 76 patients, accounting for 78 cases (2 patients were operated on twice and were assessed as 4 individual patients) (59% women, 41% men; mean age, 22.8 years; white race, 100%; and mean weight, 68.3 kg). At 1.5 hours, mean SPIDs at rest and on swallowing were significantly greater in the combination group than in the acetaminophen, ketoprofen, and placebo groups (all, P < 0.05). Mean time to onset of pain relief (PID ≥1) at rest and on swallowing were significantly less in the combination group than the acetaminophen, ketoprofen, and placebo groups (all, P < 0.05). Median time to use of rescue medication was significantly longer in the combination group than in the acetaminophen group (P = 0.006) and the placebo group (P < 0.001) but not the ketoprofen group. At 1.5 hours after administration, maximum sedation scores were not significantly different between the study groups. The prevalences of trismus, bleeding, and edema were not significantly different between the study groups.Conclusions: The results from this study suggest that the combination of ketoprofen 100 mg + acetaminophen 1000 mg provided a significantly more rapid onset of analgesia than either drug given alone in the management of pain after oral surgery in this patient population. Adverse events were not significantly different between the study groups. These results support the clinical practice of combining ketoprofen with acetaminophen for the management of acute pain.     

Ibuprofen liquigel for oral surgery pain

BACKGROUND: Ibuprofen liquigel is a solubilized potassium ibuprofen 200-mg gelatin capsule formulation that was approved for over-the-counter use in 1995. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the analgesic efficacy and tolerability of ibuprofen liquigel 200 mg, ibuprofen liquigel 400 mg, acetaminophen caplets 1000 mg, and placebo in patients experiencing moderate or severe pain after surgical removal of impacted third molars. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, 6-hour study was conducted in 210 patients experiencing moderate or severe postoperative pain. Ratings of pain intensity and pain relief were recorded every 15 minutes for the first hour, at 90 and 120 minutes, and then hourly through hour 6. The onsets of first perceptible relief and meaningful relief were recorded using 2 stopwatches. An analysis of variance model was employed to test for significant differences (P < or = 0.05) between treatment groups with respect to pain relief, pain intensity difference, total pain relief (TOTPAR), and summed pain intensity difference (SPID). Stopwatch measures were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Drug tolerability was assessed by monitoring the occurrence of adverse events. RESULTS: During the first 2 hours of the study (TOTPAR 2 and SPID 2), all active treatments were significantly more efficacious than placebo (P < 0.001), with ibuprofen liquigel 200 and 400 mg significantly more efficacious than acetaminophen 1000 mg (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively). For the entire duration of the study (TOTPAR 6 and SPID 6), only the 2 doses of ibuprofen liquigel were significantly more efficacious than placebo (P < 0.001). Ibuprofen liquigel 200 and 400 mg were also significantly more efficacious than acetaminophen 1000 mg on the summary measures TOTPAR 6 and SPID 6 (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively). Analysis of the stopwatch data revealed that all active treatments displayed significantly more rapid onsets to confirmed first perceptible relief (P < 0.001 to < 0.05) and meaningful relief (P < 0.001 to < 0.01) than did placebo, with ibuprofen liquigel 400 mg displaying a significantly more rapid onset to meaningful relief than acetaminophen 1000 mg (P < 0.05) and a significantly more rapid onset to confirmed first perceptible relief than acetaminophen 1000 mg (P < 0.001) and ibuprofen liquigel 200 mg (P < 0.01). All adverse events were considered mild or moderate, with an overall incidence of 11.5% in the ibuprofen liquigel 200-mg group, 6.8% in the ibuprofen liquigel 400-mg group, 19.0% in the acetaminophen 1000-mg group, and 25.9% in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Ibuprofen liquigel provided greater peak and overall analgesic effects and a more rapid onset to analgesia than did acetaminophen 1000 mg.     

Ketoprofen, acetaminophen, and placebo in the treatment of tension headache

Seven hundred three subjects completed a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, single-center study comparing the single-dose efficacy of ketoprofen 12.5 mg, ketoprofen 25 mg, acetaminophen 1000 mg, and placebo in the treatment of tension headache. For the primary efficacy variable, 4-hour sum of pain relief intensity differences, ketoprofen 25 mg was significantly superior to placebo. Ketoprofen 25 mg also demonstrated superior pain relief in the first hour after dosing, and the time to meaningful pain relief was significantly shorter for the ketoprofen 25-mg group. Ketoprofen 12.5 mg proved to be significantly superior to placebo for pain relief intensity difference and pain relief at 3 hours, global assessment of medication at 4 hours, and for time to onset of meaningful pain relief. The data suggest a dose response for ketoprofen 12.5 mg and 25 mg. Acetaminophen 1000 mg proved to be numerically more favorable than placebo in most variables, but could not be separated from placebo with statistical significance. In spite of possible inflation of the placebo response due to sensitivity limits of the study, ketoprofen 25 mg demonstrated a more rapid onset of analgesia compared to acetaminophen 1000 mg, and patients' global assessment rated ketoprofen 25 mg higher than acetaminophen 1000 mg.     

Aspirin compared with acetaminophen in the treatment of fever and other symptoms of upper respiratory tract infection in adults: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, single-dose, 6-hour dose-ranging study

BACKGROUND: Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) and acetaminophen (paracetamol) are frequently used to treat fever and other symptoms of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). Both are available over the counter for use at the standard recommended doses of 500 and 1000 mg per single use. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the efficacy, safety profiles, and tolerability of aspirin 500 and 1000 mg and acetaminophen 500 and 1000 mg compared with placebo in adult patients with acute febrile URTI of suspected viral origin. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial conducted in Ukraine and Russia. Patients with URTI and acute fever of > or =38.5 degrees C received a single dose of aspirin 500 or 1000 mg, acetaminophen 500 or 1000 mg, or matching placebo. Oral body temperature was measured in the clinic at specified time points up to 6 hours after dosing. The intensity of other symptoms of URTI was rated by patients at baseline and at 2, 4, and 6 hours after dosing (scale from 0 = none to 10 = severe). The primary efficacy measure was the AUC for the change in orally measured body temperature from the time of treatment (baseline) to 4 hours after dosing. Secondary outcome measures included the change in body temperature from baseline to specified time points between 0.5 and 6 hours after dosing, the difference between baseline and the lowest measured body temperature, the time to the lowest measured body temperature, and the intensity of other symptoms of URTI (ie, headache, sinus sensitivity to percussion, sore throat, achiness, and feverish discomfort). Tolerability was monitored by recording of adverse events. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-two patients were enrolled (78 in both aspirin groups, 79 in both acetaminophen groups, 78 in the placebo group). Demographic and baseline characteristics were comparable in the 5 groups; 51% of patients were male, with a mean age of 37.4 years and a mean body weight of 74.3 kg. The AUC values for the change in body temperature 0 to 4 hours after dosing were 3.18 (95% CI, 2.78-3.57) for aspirin 500 mg, 4.26 (95% CI, 3.84-4.68) for aspirin 1000 mg, 3.13 (95% CI, 2.77-3.49) for acetaminophen 500 mg, 4.11 (95% CI, 3.73-4.49) for acetaminophen 1000 mg, and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.38-1.13) for placebo. In terms of the primary efficacy variable, all active treatments were significantly superior to placebo (P < 0.001, 1-sided t test), with no significant differences between them. Reductions in body temperature were significantly greater with the 1000-mg doses of both active treatments compared with the 500-mg doses (P< 0.001, 1-sided t test). The mean maximum temperature reductions were 1.32 degrees C, 1.25 degrees C, 1.67 degrees C,1.71 degrees C, and 0.63 degrees C in the respective treatment groups. Significant reductions were seen in the mean intensity of headache, achiness, and feverish discomfort with all active treatments at most time points (P < 0.001), but not in sinus sensitivity to percussion or sore throat. All treatments were equally well tolerated, and no clinically significant adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-dose study, aspirin 500 and 1000 mg and acetaminophen 500 and 1000 mg were more effective against fever and other symptoms of URTI than placebo. Both active treatments showed dose-related efficacy, and there was no significant difference between equal doses of the 2 agents. Safety profiles and tolerability were also comparable between treatments.