IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dbk/nursin/2025v5a70.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pharmacodynamics of pregabalin and gabapentin as pain treatment in cervical and lumbar radiculopathy in adults

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriela Jackelin López García
  • Keilyn Alejandra Cardozo Vivas
  • Alejandro Josué Palmera Peralta
  • Germán Alejandro Pinto Blanco
  • Suheil Hernández

Abstract

The general objective to analyze the pharmacodynamics of Pregabalin and Gabapentin as pain treatment in cervical and lumbar radiculopathy in adult patients of the Neurosurgery service at the Central Hospital of Maracay, Aragua State, Venezuela, during the period from April to September 2024.Materials and Methods An observational, evaluative, prospective and longitudinal study was conducted. The sample consisted of 21 patients, divided into two groups: Group A (n=14) treated with Gabapentin 300 mg and Group B (n=7) treated with Pregabalin 75 mg. The results the mean age was 52.07 ± 10.4 years in Group A and 47.71 ± 7.8 years in Group B (p = 0.300). Most patients were women (78.57% in Group A and 85.71% in Group B, p = 1,000). Both treatments significantly reduced pain (Gabapentin: 7.07 ± 2.2 to 4.78 ± 2.8; Pregabalin: 7.00 ± 2.2 to 5.28 ± 12.2, p = 0.813). Muscle strength improved in both groups, but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.055). Sensitivity improved in both groups, however, it was lower in the Pregabalin group after treatment (p = 0.029). Adverse events were more frequent in the Pregabalin group (57.14%) compared to Gabapentin (42.86%, p = 0.659). In conclusion, both Pregabalin and Gabapentin are effective in reducing pain in patients with cervical and lumbar radiculopathy. Pregabalin had a higher incidence of adverse effects, which should be considered when choosing treatment. An individualized approach and ongoing follow-up are recommended to optimize neuropathic pain management.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:dbk:nursin:2025v5a70
DOI: 10.56294/nds2026303
as

Download full text from publisher

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a
for a similarly titled item that would be available.

More about this item

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dbk:nursin:2025v5a70. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Javier Gonzalez-Argote (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://nds.ageditor.ar/ .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.