LXXXV Absorption from the Nasal Mucous Membrane

A Comparison of Intranasal and Oral Scopolamine for Motion Sickness Prevention in Military Personnel

“…4-7 and Table 4). The increased rate of absorption and maximal scopolamine concentration was anticipated, but the absence of side effects is in contrast to other studies that reported an increase in the incidence and/or severity of medication-induced side effects with intranasal delivery (Chinn & Smith 1953;Hyde et al, 1953;Ahmed et al, 2000). Chinn et al, (1955) and Putcha et al, (1996) reported an increase in the incidence of dizziness and dry mouth after intranasal administration of doses ranging between 0.2 to 0.6 mg.…”

“…The study conducted by Tonndorf, et al, (1953) compared subcutaneous, oral, and intranasal scopolamine and found the absorption of intranasal scopolamine to be comparable to subcutaneous in rate and "completeness." 1955) and Hyde et al, (1953), found analogous absorption results for intranasal scopolamine, however, they also reported a decrease in dose required to reach therapeutic levels, leading to a significant reduction in side effects. For example, marked vomiting in these studies was decreased by almost 40% with administration of only 0.2 mg of scopolamine.…”

Microdialysis pharmacokinetic study of scopolamine in plasma, olfactory bulb and vestibule after intranasal administration

“…Scopolamine (SCOP, CAS:51-34-3, Figure 1), a naturally occurring anti-muscarinic agent, has been used for the prevention and treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with motion sickness for almost 200 years. About 60 years ago, the nasal absorption of SCOP in solution was reported by Hyde et al (1953). They found that SCOP could produce faster responses and greater therapeutic activity than an equivalent oral dose.…”

Preparation of ion-activated in situ gel systems of scopolamine hydrobromide and evaluation of its antimotion sickness efficacy

“…Moreover, SCOP concentrations in plasma also declined more slowly after the patches were removed than after an iv dose. The reported delay in the drug reaching the circulation after patch application, and the potential for prolonged unwanted side effects such as dry mouth, dizziness, or blurred vision, led us to look for an alternative route of administration to oral or transdermal delivery.About 50 years ago, the nasal absorption of SCOP in solution was reported by Hyde et al [4] . They found that SCOP could produce faster responses and greater therapeutic activity than an equivalent oral dose.…”