Background Duloxetine and pregabalin are among the most widely used medications in the treatment of patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FM). Objectives To add to the very few lines of evidence that exist on the comparative safety and efficacy of these two medications. Methods In this open-label randomized clinical trial, outpatient women, who were diagnosed with FM based on American College of Rheumatology 2010 criteria, and had an age range of 18-65 years old were assigned to either duloxetine 30-60 mg or pregabalin 75-150 mg per day for 4 weeks. Patients were excluded in cases of having used duloxetine, pregabalin, gabapentin, or antidepressants within 12 weeks prior to the study, having had a history of comorbid medical conditions that could provoke chronic pain, or having had comorbid neuropsychiatric disorders, except for major depressive/anxiety disorders. Primary outcomes were between-group differences in mean score changes from baseline to end point for Widespread Pain Index (WPI) and Beck Depression Inventory-II. Secondary outcomes were the same statistical estimates, but for Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire-Revised and 12-Item Short Form Survey. Descriptive statistics and independent samples t-test were the main methods of analysis. (www.irct.ir; IRCT2016030626935N1). Results Among all the scales, only WPI scores improved with a statistically significant difference between the two treatment arms, favoring duloxetine (Mean difference in score change − 2.32, 95% CI, −4.46 to − 0.18; p = 0.034; Cohen's d 0.53 95% CI, 0.04 to 1.02). Drop out rate and cumulative incidence of nausea was significantly higher in the duloxetine arm compared to the pregabalin arm. Conclusion This study provides further evidence on higher efficacy of duloxetine compared to pregabalin for the treatment of pain in patients with fibromyalgia. Future comprehensive pragmatic clinical trials are warranted.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Due to widespread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, identification of its risk factors and clinical characteristics are important. The aim of the present study was to assess Vitamin D levels in individuals with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-19 infection and to report on its potential as a predictive marker. Materials and Methods: All patients, diagnosed with COVID-19 infection from February 16 to March 21, 2020, and referred to Firoozgar Hospital, Tehran, Iran, were enrolled in this study. Vitamin D analysis was undertaken on patient serum samples using a commercial kit (Pars Azmoon Co., Tehran, Iran). SPSS v. 22 was used for statistical analysis. Results: Vitamin D serum concentration was analyzed in a total of 317 patients whose mean age ± standard deviation was 62.05 ± 15 years and with 62.5% being male. A significant association of Vitamin D level and death was observed. Higher levels of serum Vitamin D had protection against death (odds ratio = 0.955 [95% confidence interval = 0.923–0.988], P = 0.008). Conclusion: As a preliminary study in the Iranian population who suffered COVID-19 disease, we identified that Vitamin D deficiency was associated with a higher death rate and intensive care unit admission.