Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
  • JABFM On Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal Article

Guaifenesin as a Treatment for Primary Dysmenorrhea

Jennifer S. Marsden, Charlene D. Strickland and Tina L. Clements
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice July 2004, 17 (4) 240-246; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.17.4.240
Jennifer S. Marsden
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Charlene D. Strickland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tina L. Clements
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 1.

    Mean pain scores for usual analgesic baseline, unmedicated baseline, and treatment cycles 1, 2, and 3. In each cycle, the data points are the for the first 2 hours, from 2 to 12 hours, from 12 to 24 hours, the second day, and the third day of the menses. The table at the bottom lists the number of surveys received for each cycle to highlight the study dropout rate.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 2.

    Mean constitutional and menstrual blood flow scores for usual analgesic baseline, unmedicated baseline, and treatment cycles 1, 2, and 3. In each cycle, the data points are for the first 2 hours, from 2 to 12 hours, from 12 to 24 hours, the second day, and the third day of the menses. The table at the bottom lists the number of surveys received for each cycle to highlight the study dropout rate.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    Figure 3.

    Mean gastrointestinal scores for usual analgesic baseline, unmedicated baseline, and treatment cycles 1, 2, and 3. In each cycle, the data points are for the first 2 hours, from 2 to 12 hours, from 12 to 24 hours, the second day, and the third day of the menses. The table at the bottom lists the number of surveys received for each cycle to highlight the study dropout rate.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Characteristics of Enrolled Subjects and of Subjects Returning the First Treatment Survey

    Subject CharacteristicsEnrolled Initially*Returned Survey 1*
    GuaifenesinPlaceboGuaifenesinPlacebo
    Total subjects18161312
    Age, mean years (SD)32.3 (7)32.2 (7.1)32.3 (7.4)33.9 (6.5)
    Menarche, mean years (SD)12.2 (1.9)12.6 (2.2)11.8 (2.0)13.2 (2.1)
    Menstrual cycle length, mean days† (SD)28.1 (4.3)26.6 (3.7)27.0 (4.0)27.4 (2.3)
    Weight, mean pounds (SD)178.3 (41.5)156.5 (34.9)176.3 (42.5)152.7 (35.8)
    Mean gravidity (SD)1.8 (1.5)1.4 (1.1)1.6 (1.3)1.4 (1.0)
    Infertility problems5 (28%)3 (19%)4 (31%)2 (17%)
    Bilateral tubal ligation rate0.50.30.40.3
    Age pain onset, mean years (SD)18.2 (7.7)18.6 (6.8)19.2 (8.8)19.2 (6.4)
    Work loss taking usual medication, mean days‡0.50.250.310.25
    Work loss taking no medication, mean days‡1.111.030.921.13
    • * No significant differences between drug and placebo groups using the t test (two-sample assuming equal variances).

    • † Used middle number of range they chose.

    • ‡ Prestudy.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Nonstudy Analgesic Use Reported by Sample

    None*Minimal†High‡
    Guaifenesin N (%)Placebo N (%)Guaifenesin N (%)Placebo N (%)Guaifenesin N (%)Placebo N (%)
    Trial 1
     Day 16 (46%)4 (33%)4 (31%)4 (33%)3 (23%)4 (33%)
     Day 210 (77%)5 (42%)2 (15%)3 (25%)1 (8%)4 (33%)
    Trial 2
     Day 16 (55%)1 (10%)2 (18%)3 (10%)3 (27%)6 (60%)
     Day 28 (73%)3 (30%)2 (18%)3 (30%)1 (9%)4 (40%)
    Trial 3
     Day 16 (75%)1 (11%)2 (25%)5 (56%)0 (0%)3 (33%)
     Day 26 (75%)0 (0%)2 (25%)5 (56%)0 (0%)4 (44%)
    • * No reported nonstudy analgesic medication used.

    • † Nonstudy analgesic use reported to be no more than 800 mg/day of ibuprofen, 300 mg/day of naproxen, 1250 mg/day of acetaminophen, or an equivalent combination of analgesics.

    • ‡ Nonstudy analgesic use reported to be any combination of more than 800 mg/day of ibuprofen, 300 mg/day of naproxen, or 1250 mg/day of acetaminophen.

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Overall Satisfaction with Taking Study Medication, Mean Score* on 100-mm Visual Analog Scale

    Trial 1Trial 2Trial 3
    Guaifenesin41.238.035.0
    Placebo33.325.022.3
    • * 0, not at all pleased; 100, excellent.

    • View popup
    Table 4.

    Response Ratio of Subjects with ≥50% Decrease in Lower Abdominal Pain Score from Medicated Baseline Menses at Each Study Time Interval

    Time from Onset of MensesTrial 1Trial 2Trial 3
    Guaifenesin Ratio (%)Placebo Ratio (%)Guaifenesin Ratio (%)Placebo Ratio (%)Guaifenesin Ratio (%)Placebo Ratio (%)
    Hours 0 to 26/12 (50%)2/12 (17%)3/10 (30%)4/10 (40%)1/7 (14%)3/9 (33%)
    Hours 2 to 126/12 (50%)2/11 (18%)4/10 (40%)3/9 (33%)2/7 (28%)1/8 (13%)
    Hours 12 to 246/11 (55%)4/10 (40%)5/10 (50%)2/9 (22%)4/7 (57%)1/8 (13%)
    Second Day5/12 (42%)4/10 (40%)5/10 (50%)2/8 (25%)5/7 (71%)1/8 (13%)
    Third Day5/12 (42%)4/10 (40%)3/10 (30%)4/8 (50%)3/7 (43%)2/8 (25%)
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice: 17 (4)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice
Vol. 17, Issue 4
1 Jul 2004
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Guaifenesin as a Treatment for Primary Dysmenorrhea
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
8 + 5 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Guaifenesin as a Treatment for Primary Dysmenorrhea
Jennifer S. Marsden, Charlene D. Strickland, Tina L. Clements
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice Jul 2004, 17 (4) 240-246; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.17.4.240

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Guaifenesin as a Treatment for Primary Dysmenorrhea
Jennifer S. Marsden, Charlene D. Strickland, Tina L. Clements
The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice Jul 2004, 17 (4) 240-246; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.17.4.240
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • How Much Time Do Patients with Diabetes Spend on Self-Care?
  • Screening for Bipolar Disorder in Patients Treated for Depression in a Family Medicine Clinic
  • Screening for Dementia: Family Caregiver Questionnaires Reliably Predict Dementia
Show more Original Articles

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2023 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire