Skip to content

Comparing Oral and Sublingual Ketamine Lozenges as Rescue Analgesics in Adults with Acute Pain

Comparing Oral and Sublingual Ketamine Lozenges as Rescue Analgesics in Adults with Acute pain

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ANZCTR
Registry ID
ACTRN12621000240842
Acronym
OSKet
Enrollment
30
Registered
2021-03-08
Start date
2008-12-15
Completion date
2011-12-08
Last updated
2021-03-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Brief summary

Case reports and case series have documented efficacy of either sublingual or oral ketamine. They have not been compared with each other in past. The study aims to compare the efficacy between the two routes and their side effects profile in hope of guiding future practice.

Interventions

Inpatients with acute pain rated as 5 or more on numerical rating scales (NRS) started on ketamine lozenges were recruited after informed consent. The primary aim is to compare clinical efficacy of oral and sublingual ketamine lozenges. Patients were randomised to receive ketamine 50mg lozenge sublingually with placebo lozenge orally or ketamine 50mg lozenge orally with placebo lozenge sublingually on each treatment day. A pharmacist did the randomisation, enabling researchers administering

Inpatients with acute pain rated as 5 or more on numerical rating scales (NRS) started on ketamine lozenges were recruited after informed consent. The primary aim is to compare clinical efficacy of oral and sublingual ketamine lozenges. Patients were randomised to receive ketamine 50mg lozenge sublingually with placebo lozenge orally or ketamine 50mg lozenge orally with placebo lozenge sublingually on each treatment day. A pharmacist did the randomisation, enabling researchers administering the treatment over two days to remain blinded. Participants were asked to swallow first lozenge and then suck on second lozenge until it has dissolved completely on both days. Participants were asked the question if the lozenge has dissolved completely on each treatment day. Time to first effect and meaningful effects were documented by research staff. Participants were then given a timer and data collection sheet. Participants were advised on how to score their pain at rest and at set intervals during the trial. Pain scores were self recorded half hourly for first two hours, then hourly for next two hours. Side effects were recorded for each treatment period. Patients satisfaction and global impression of change were recorded at the end of each treatment periods by research staff.

Sponsors

University of Western Australia
Lead SponsorUniversity

Study design

Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Crossover
Primary purpose
Treatment
Masking
Blinded (masking used) (Subject, Caregiver, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1) 18years old or above 2) Inpatients with acute breakthrough pain of 5 or more on numerical rating scale who required additional medication and previously responded to sublingual ketamine. 3) able to self-assess pain scores on NRS

Exclusion criteria

Patients with known contraindications to ketamine such as: allergy to ketamine; severe cardiovascular disease; history of stroke or cerebral trauma; significant liver disease. Pregnant women or breastfeeding mothers.

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ANZCTR · Data processed: Feb 21, 2026