Abstract Aim: The aim of the present study was to assess the Diabetes and Hypertension among patients with psychiatric illnesses attending outpatient services. Material & Methods: A retrospective study was conducted among 500 patients seeking psychiatric care at the out-patient of Netaji Subhas Medical College and Hospital, Bihta, Patna, Bihar, India carried out between the duration of 8 months. Results: The mean age of the entire sample population was 42.8 years, with mean age comparable between males and females. Males represented 40% of the study population. Mean body mass index (BMI) and mean blood pressure (BP) of the study population was 26.4 kg/m2 and 120.5/75.5 mmHg, respectively. A large proportion of patients did not smoke (90%) or consume alcohol (95%). 15% had diabetes and 8% and hypertension. 5% had both diabetes and hypertension. 46.66% of patients with diabetes had the condition for less than 5 years while 53.34% of patients with hypertension had the condition for at least 5 years or longer. More than 86.66% of patients with diabetes or hypertension were undergoing treatment for their physical NCD. Twenty patients (4%) had both diabetes and hypertension. Age, presence of a family history of any physical NCD and duration of psychiatric illness of ≥5years were significantly associated with the presence of diabetes or hypertension (p<0.05). Schizophrenia, schizotypal and delusional disorders were most prevalent among patients with diabetes or hypertension, and combinations of antipsychotics with other psychotropic medications were predominantly prescribed to patients with these physical NCDs. No association was observed between the psychiatric diagnosis or psychotropic medications with the presence of diabetes or hypertension. Conclusion: Diabetes and hypertension are common physical NCDs in patients with psychiatric illness. Therefore, it is important that psychiatrists be aware of and identify patients who are at risk for such NCDs

Description

Abstract (English)

Abstract
Aim: The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 1% Terbinafine HCl ointment with
1% Naftifine HCl in patients with Tinea cruris.
Methods: This study was done in the Department of Pharmacology and Department of Dermatology,
Venereology & Leprosy, Patna Medical College and Hospital, Patna for one year. The study was conducted after
approval from Institutional Ethical Committee, Patna Medical College, Patna.
Results: The difference between these two groups in terms of demographic details was not statistically significant.
Most of the study participants had presented with multiple lesions in both group A (terbinafine group) and group
B (butenafine group). The difference between these two groups was not statistically significant. In group A
(terbinafine group), erythema was present in 40 (100.0%) cases, scaling was present in 40 (100.0%) cases, central
clearing was present in 34 (85%) cases, papule was present in 37 (92.5%) cases. The difference was not
statistically significant (p>0.05) between two groups. The difference between the Clinical assessment score of the
two groups was significant (p=0.001) after 1st and 2nd week. Transient burning sensation at the application site
was found in one of 2 (5%) cases of Group A (terbinafine group); but it resolved spontaneously and did not require
discontinuation of therapy. In contrast, no side effects were reported by Group B (butenafine group) participants.
The difference was not statistically significant (p>0.05).
Conclusion: The present study concluded that there was significant difference between the mean clinical
assessment score of the two groups at the end of 2 weeks treatment period. Butenafine produced the quickest
result and clinical efficacy was much higher with butenafine cream than that of terbinafine cream and this
difference was statistically significant. Therefore, treatment with butenafine 1% cream was reported superior to
treatment with terbinafine 1% cream in case of tinea cruris