Background: Pain is one of the most frequent reasons for visiting a doctor. Large-scale studies in Western countries have shown that a fifth of the adult population suffer from chronic pain. Treatment of pain, still a major problem in clinical practice. Despite several available analgesics, unrelieved pain remains a major health care issue. Amitriptyline is a tricyclic antidepressant drug, which is regarded as adjuvant analgesic. There is a common consensus among the researchers on analgesic effect of amitriptyline which is mediated by central pathway but for the peripheral mechanism no conclusive evidence exists till now.Methods: To establish the analgesic mechanism of amitriptyline we tried to evaluate the analgesic activity on different mice models for central (Radiant heat tail flick test and Haffner’s tail clip method) and peripheral analgesia (Writhing test). We also compare the effects of amitriptyline with standard drugs for central and peripheral analgesia.Results: Both in Radiant heat tail flick test and Haffner’s tail clip method we found that the amitriptyline showed significant (p<0.05 to p<0.001) activity as compared to control and diclofenac group. But in comparison to pentazocin group amitriptyline didn’t show significant difference in the reaction time. In acetic acid induced writhing test amitriptyline group mice showed 41.09% reduction in number of writhes as compared to control group. While the standard control (Diclofenac) showed reduction of 65.17% as compared to control. So, amitriptyline showed comparable efficacy towards reduction in number of writhes with that of diclofenac.Conclusions: The results revealed that amitriptyline has significant analgesic activity which is mediated by modulation of both the central and peripheral pathways.

Background: Healthcare workers are at a higher risk of having Covid infection than other professionals. Thus, it is more important for them to wear face masks for themselves and for the sake of their co-workers and public health. The use of face masks is mainly limited by their perceived discomfort and concerns regarding inadequate gas exchange. Still, there are serious concerns about the use of masks over a long period. Aims: This study aimed to study the effects of different types of face masks on clinical parameters like oxygen saturation, Respiratory rate, and pulse rate. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted on 218 subjects from March 2021 to April 2021. They used different types of masks-like cloth masks, surgical masks, N95 masks, and double masks. A pulse oximeter applied to the index finger was used for the non-invasive determination of clinical parameters like oxygen saturation, heart rate, and respiratory rate. Results: There was a significant decrease in oxygen saturation seen in subjects using the surgical mask and N-95 mask, but there was no change in oxygen saturation in participants who wore cloth masks. In our study, heart rates increased significantly at the end of the study in all groups irrespective of the mask they wore. However, the respiratory rate increased significantly only in those participants who wore N-95 masks. Results: There was a significant decrease in oxygen saturation seen in subjects using the surgical mask and N-95 mask, but there was no change in oxygen saturation in participants who wore cloth masks. In our study, heart rates increased significantly at the end of the study in all groups irrespective of the mask they wore. However, the respiratory rate increased significantly only in those participants who wore N-95 masks. Conclusion: Our study concludes that wearing a face mask for a long period induces an increase in heart rate and shortness of breath along with a significant reduction in oxygen saturation.

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was termed "the big little problem" nearly a quarter century ago in an editorial .The past decade has witnessed the introduction of several significant innovations to combat PONV, but it still remains as big a problem as before because newer choices and confusions over standardization added side by side . The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of palonosetron with that of granisetron and ondansetron in the treatment and prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: This randomized prospective comparative clinical study was carried out in the NIMS Medical College & Hospital, NIMS University, Jaipur, during the period of January 2013 to December 2013 amongst female patients of ASA grade I and II (ASA = American Society of anesthesiology) , scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anesthesia. A total number of 90 patients were selected and randomized into three groups of 30 patients each. Group-I was given inj. palonosetron (0.25 mg), Group-II was given inj. granisetron (1 mg) and Group-III was given inj. ondansetron (8 mg). One way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Pearson"s Chi-square test were done as the tests of significance whenever applicable to compare the mean of different groups. Results: The incidence of nausea was 10% in Palonosetron-group while it was found to be 60% in Ondansetrongroup. The incidence of vomiting was 6.7% in group-I, 26.6% in group-II & 53.3% in group-III respectively. The difference was statistically significant between group I vs group II (p <0.05). 13.3% of patients in Palonosetron-group required rescue antiemetic, while in Ondansetron-group, it was 46.7%. Conclusions: To conclude, palonosetron greatly reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, and also the requirement of rescue antiemetic in postoperative period than granisetron and ondansetron. Patients were satisfied by using this drug. Palonosetron is more effective in comparison to granisetron and ondansetron in the prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.