Dapsone has been the principal drug in a multidrug regimen recommended by the World Health Organization for the treatment of leprosy. It is also widely used by dermatologists in varied skin conditions like dermatitis herpetiformis, bullous pemphigoid, Behcet's disease, lupus erythematous and a host of other skin diseases. Hence an attempt has been made to review the utilization and qualitative evaluation of dapsone over a period of 6 months in a tertiary care teaching hospital. The study consisted of 80 patients (54 leprosy and 26 non-leprosy patients), prescribed with dapsone 100 mg oral once daily. The prescribing patterns of dapsone in leprosy and other dermatological conditions (non-leprosy) were analyzed and the safety, efficacy and appropriateness of the doses prescribed were reviewed. The adverse drug reactions observed in the study population were type I Lepra reactions, gastrointestinal side effects (abdominal pain and anorexia), peripheral neuropathy, other nervous side effects (insomnia, headache and vertigo) and other adverse reactions (fever and tinnitus). Patient information leaflets were distributed to patients to educate on the appropriate use of dapsone.

Background:Treatment of chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) is challenging because of its unpredictable course and negative influence on the quality of life. New treatments are being developed, but antihistaminics remain the cornerstone of the therapeutic approach. Newer generation antihistaminics such as loratadine and levocetirizine have already proved to be safe and efficacious for CIU.Objective:To choose the better drug between loratadine and levocetirizine for CIU, by comparing their efficacy and safety.Methods:A randomized, open, outdoor-based clinical study was conducted on 60 patients of CIU, to compare the two drugs. After initial clinical assessment and baseline investigations, loratadine was prescribed to 30 patients and levocetirizine to another 30 patients for four weeks. At follow-up, the patients were re-evaluated and then compared using different statistical tools.Result:The comparative study showed that the changes in differential eosinophil count (P = 0.006) and absolute eosinophil count (P = 0.003) in the levocetirizine group was statistically significant. The results of the Total Symptom Score showed better symptomatic improvement of CIU with levocetirizine as compared to loratadine. The overall incidence of adverse drug reactions was also found to be less in the levocetirizine group.Conclusion:An analysis of the results of all the parameters of safety and efficacy proves the superiority of levocetirizine over loratadine for CIU.

No abstract