Effectiveness of psychotropic medications in the maintenance phase of bipolar disorder:a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of maintenance treatments for bipolar disorder. Placebo-controlled or active comparator bipolar maintenance clinical trials of ≥6 months' duration with at least 15 patients/treatment group were identified using Medline, EMBASE, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane databases (1993 to July 2010). The main outcome measure was relative risk for relapse for patients in remission. Twenty trials (5,364 patients) were identified. Overall, lithium and quetiapine were the most studied agents (eight and five trials, respectively). The majority of studies included patients who had previously responded to treatment for an acute episode. All interventions, with the exception of perphenazine+mood stabilizer, showed a relative risk for manic/mixed or depressive relapse below 1.0, although there was variation in the statistical significance of the findings vs. placebo. No monotherapy was associated with a significantly reduced risk for both manic/mixed and depressed relapse. Of the combination treatments, only quetiapine+lithium/divalproex, was associated with a significantly reduced risk vs. comparator (placebo+lithium/valproate) for relapse at both the manic/mixed and depressed poles of bipolar illness. Limitations for the analysis include differences in study durations and definitions of relapse. In conclusion, available maintenance therapies show considerable variation in efficacy. The efficacy of lithium and divalproex has been confirmed, but newer therapies, such as a number of atypical antipsychotics were also shown to be effective in bipolar disorder. Efficacy of all maintenance interventions needs to be balanced against the safety and tolerability profiles of individual agents.

Efficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis.

Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated efficacy for second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of acute mania in bipolar disorder. Despite depression being considered the hallmark of bipolar disorder, there are no published systematic reviews or meta-analyses to evaluate the efficacy of modern atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. We systematically reviewed published or registered randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of modern antipsychotics in adult bipolar I and/or II depressive patients (DSM-IV criteria). Efficacy outcomes were assessed based on changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) during an 8-wk period. Data were combined through meta-analysis using risk ratio as an effect size with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and with a level of statistical significance of 5% (p<0.05). We identified five RCTs; four involved antipsychotic monotherapy and one addressed both monotherapy and combination with an antidepressant. The two quetiapine trials analysed the safety and efficacy of two doses: 300 and 600 mg/d. The only olanzapine trial assessed olanzapine monotherapy within a range of 5-20 mg/d and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination within a range of 5-20 mg/d and 6-12 mg/d, respectively. The two aripiprazole placebo-controlled trials assessed doses of 5-30 mg/d. Quetiapine and olanzapine trials (3/5, 60%) demonstrated superiority over placebo (p<0.001). Only 2/5 (40%) (both aripiprazole trials) failed in the primary efficacy measure after the first 6 wk. Some modern antipsychotics (quetiapine and olanzapine) have demonstrated efficacy in bipolar depressive patients from week 1 onwards. Rapid onset of action seems to be a common feature of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. Comment in The following popper user interface control may not be accessible. Tab to the next button to revert the control to an accessible version.Destroy user interface controlEfficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis--results to be interpreted with caution.

Efficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis.

Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated efficacy for second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of acute mania in bipolar disorder. Despite depression being considered the hallmark of bipolar disorder, there are no published systematic reviews or meta-analyses to evaluate the efficacy of modern atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. We systematically reviewed published or registered randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of modern antipsychotics in adult bipolar I and/or II depressive patients (DSM-IV criteria). Efficacy outcomes were assessed based on changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) during an 8-wk period. Data were combined through meta-analysis using risk ratio as an effect size with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and with a level of statistical significance of 5% (p<0.05). We identified five RCTs; four involved antipsychotic monotherapy and one addressed both monotherapy and combination with an antidepressant. The two quetiapine trials analysed the safety and efficacy of two doses: 300 and 600 mg/d. The only olanzapine trial assessed olanzapine monotherapy within a range of 5-20 mg/d and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination within a range of 5-20 mg/d and 6-12 mg/d, respectively. The two aripiprazole placebo-controlled trials assessed doses of 5-30 mg/d. Quetiapine and olanzapine trials (3/5, 60%) demonstrated superiority over placebo (p<0.001). Only 2/5 (40%) (both aripiprazole trials) failed in the primary efficacy measure after the first 6 wk. Some modern antipsychotics (quetiapine and olanzapine) have demonstrated efficacy in bipolar depressive patients from week 1 onwards. Rapid onset of action seems to be a common feature of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. Comment in The following popper user interface control may not be accessible. Tab to the next button to revert the control to an accessible version.Destroy user interface controlEfficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis--results to be interpreted with caution.

Community pharmacist intervention in depressed primary care patients (PRODEFAR study): randomized controlled trial protocol.

Background: Treatment of depression, the most prevalent and costly mental disorder, needs to be improved. Non-concordance with clinical guidelines and non-adherence can limit the efficacy of pharmacological treatment of depression. Through pharmaceutical care, pharmacists can improve patients' compliance and wellbeing. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and costeffectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention developed to improve adherence and outcomes of primary care patients with depression. Methods/design: A randomized controlled trial, with 6-month follow-up, comparing patients receiving a pharmaceutical care support programme in primary care with patients receiving usual care. The total sample comprises 194 patients (aged between 18 and 75) diagnosed with depressive disorder in a primary care health centre in the province of Barcelona (Spain). Subjects will be asked for written informed consent in order to participate in the study. Diagnosis will be confirmed using the SCID-I. The intervention consists of an educational programme focused on improving knowledge about medication, making patients aware of the importance of compliance, reducing stigma, reassuring patients about side-effects and stressing the importance of carrying out general practitioners' advice. Measurements will take place at baseline, and after 3 and 6 months. Main outcome measure is compliance with antidepressants. Secondary outcomes include; clinical severity of depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (STAI-S), health-related quality of life (EuroQol-5D), satisfaction with the treatment received, side-effects, chronic physical conditions and sociodemographics. The use of healthcare and social care services will be assessed with an adapted version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI). Discussion: This trial will provide valuable information for health professionals and policy makers on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pharmaceutical intervention programme in the context of primary care. Trial registration: NCT00794196

Nadolol plus isosorbide mononitrate alone or associated with band ligation in the prevention of recurrent bleeding: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Background and aims: Previous clinical trials suggest that adding non-selective beta-blockers improves the efficacy of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) in the prevention of recurrent bleeding, but no study has evaluated whether EBL improves the efficacy of beta-blockers + isosorbide-5-mononitrate. The present study was aimed at evaluating this issue in a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) and to correlate changes in hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) during treatment with clinical outcomes. Methods: 158 patients with cirrhosis, admitted because of variceal bleeding, were randomised to receive nadolol+isosorbide-5-mononitrate alone (Drug: n=78) or combined with EBL (Drug+EBL; n=80). HVPG measurements were performed at randomisation and after 4¿6 weeks on medical therapy. Results: Median follow-up was 15 months. One-year probability of recurrent bleeding was similar in both groups (33% vs 26%: p=0.3). There were no significant differences in survival or need of rescue shunts. Overall adverse events or those requiring hospital admission were significantly more frequent in the Drug+EBL group. Recurrent bleeding was significantly more frequent in HVPG non-responders than in responders (HVPG reduction ¿20% or ¿12 mm Hg). Among non-responders recurrent bleeding was similar in patients treated with Drugs or Drugs+EBL. Conclusions: Adding EBL to pharmacological treatment did not reduce recurrent bleeding, the need for rescue therapy, or mortality, and was associated with more adverse events. Furthermore, associating EBL to drug therapy did not reduce the high rebleeding risk of HVPG non-responders.

Community pharmacist intervention in depressed primary care patients (PRODEFAR study): randomized controlled trial protocol.

Background: Treatment of depression, the most prevalent and costly mental disorder, needs to be improved. Non-concordance with clinical guidelines and non-adherence can limit the efficacy of pharmacological treatment of depression. Through pharmaceutical care, pharmacists can improve patients' compliance and wellbeing. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and costeffectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention developed to improve adherence and outcomes of primary care patients with depression. Methods/design: A randomized controlled trial, with 6-month follow-up, comparing patients receiving a pharmaceutical care support programme in primary care with patients receiving usual care. The total sample comprises 194 patients (aged between 18 and 75) diagnosed with depressive disorder in a primary care health centre in the province of Barcelona (Spain). Subjects will be asked for written informed consent in order to participate in the study. Diagnosis will be confirmed using the SCID-I. The intervention consists of an educational programme focused on improving knowledge about medication, making patients aware of the importance of compliance, reducing stigma, reassuring patients about side-effects and stressing the importance of carrying out general practitioners' advice. Measurements will take place at baseline, and after 3 and 6 months. Main outcome measure is compliance with antidepressants. Secondary outcomes include; clinical severity of depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (STAI-S), health-related quality of life (EuroQol-5D), satisfaction with the treatment received, side-effects, chronic physical conditions and sociodemographics. The use of healthcare and social care services will be assessed with an adapted version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI). Discussion: This trial will provide valuable information for health professionals and policy makers on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pharmaceutical intervention programme in the context of primary care. Trial registration: NCT00794196

Effect of corticosteroids on the clinical course of community-acquired pneumonia: a randomized controlled trial

Introduction The benefit of corticosteroids as adjunctive treatment in patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) requiring hospital admission remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of corticosteroid treatment on outcomes in patients with CAP. Methods This was a prospective, double-blind and randomized study. All patients received treatment with ceftriaxone plus levofloxacin and methyl-prednisolone (MPDN) administered randomly and blindly as an initial bolus, followed by a tapering regimen, or placebo. Results Of the 56 patients included in the study, 28 (50%) were treated with concomitant corticosteroids. Patients included in the MPDN group show a more favourable evolution of the pO2/FiO2 ratio and faster decrease of fever, as well as greater radiological improvement at seven days. The time to resolution of morbidity was also significantly shorter in this group. Six patients met the criteria for mechanical ventilation (MV): five in the placebo group (22.7%) and one in the MPDN group (4.3%). The duration of MV was 13 days (interquartile range 7 to 26 days) for the placebo group and three days for the only case in the MPDN group. The differences did not reach statistical significance. Interleukin (IL)-6 and C-reactive protein (CRP) showed a significantly quicker decrease after 24 h of treatment among patients treated with MPDN. No differences in mortality were found among groups. Conclusions MPDN treatment, in combination with antibiotics, improves respiratory failure and accelerates the timing of clinical resolution of severe CAP needing hospital admission.

Cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention in patients with depression: a randomized controlled trial (PRODEFAR study)

Background: Non-adherence to antidepressants generates higher costs for the treatment of depression. Little is known about the cost-effectiveness of pharmacist's interventions aimed at improving adherence to antidepressants. The study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention in comparison with usual care in depressed patients initiating treatment with antidepressants in primary care. Methods: Patients were recruited by general practitioners and randomized to community pharmacist intervention (87) that received an educational intervention and usual care (92). Adherence to antidepressants, clinical symptoms, Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs), use of healthcare services and productivity losses were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months. Results: There were no significant differences between groups in costs or effects. From a societal perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the community pharmacist intervention compared with usual care was 1,866 for extra adherent patient and 9,872 per extra QALY. In terms of remission of depressive symptoms, the usual care dominated the community pharmacist intervention. If willingness to pay (WTP) is 30,000 per extra adherent patient, remission of symptoms or QALYs, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective was 0.71, 0.46 and 0.75, respectively (societal perspective). From a healthcare perspective, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective in terms of adherence, QALYs and remission was of 0.71, 0.76 and 0.46, respectively, if WTP is 30,000. Conclusion: A brief community pharmacist intervention addressed to depressed patients initiating antidepressant treatment showed a probability of being cost-effective of 0.71 and 0.75 in terms of improvement of adherence and QALYs, respectively, when compared to usual care. Regular implementation of the community pharmacist intervention is not recommended.

Evaluation of a pharmacist intervention on patients initiating pharmacological treatment for depression: a randomized controlled superiority trial

Major depression is associated with high burden, disability and costs. Non-adherence limits the effectiveness of antidepressants. Community pharmacists (CP) are in a privileged position to help patients cope with antidepressant treatment. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of a CP intervention on primary care patients who had initiated antidepressant treatment. Newly diagnosed primary care patients were randomised to usual care (UC) (92) or pharmacist intervention (87). Patients were followed up at 6 months and evaluated three times (Baseline, and at 3 and 6 months). Outcome measurements included clinical severity of depression (PHQ-9), health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (Euroqol-5D) and satisfaction with pharmacy care. Adherence was continuously registered from the computerised pharmacy records. Non-adherence was defined as refilling less than 80% of doses or having a medication-free gap of more than 1 month. Patients in the intervention group were more likely to remain adherent at 3 and 6 months follow-up but the difference was not statistically significant. Patients in the intervention group showed greater statistically significant improvement in HRQOL compared with UC patients both in the main analysis and PP analyses. No statistically significant differences were observed in clinical symptoms or satisfaction with the pharmacy service. The results of our study indicate that a brief intervention in community pharmacies does not improve depressed patients' adherence or clinical symptoms. This intervention helped patients to improve their HRQOL, which is an overall measure of patient status.

Bupivacaine 0.5 % versus articaine 4 % for the removal of lower third molars. A crossover randomized controlled trial

Objective: To compare the anesthetic action of 0.5% bupivacaine in relation to 4% articaine, both with 1:200,000 epinephrine, in the surgical removal of lower third molars. As a secondary objective hemodynamic changes using both anesthetics were analyzed. Study Design: Triple-blind crossover randomized clinical trial. Eighteen patients underwent bilateral removal of impacted lower third molars using 0.5% bupivacaine or 4% articaine in two different appointments. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative variables were recorded. Differences were assessed with McNemar tests and repeated measures ANOVA tests. Results: Both solutions exhibited similar latency times and intraoperative efficacy. Statistical significant lower pain levels were observed with bupivacaine between the fifth (p=0.011) and the ninth (p=0.007) postoperative hours. Bupivacaine provided significantly longer lasting soft tissue anesthesia (p<0.05). Systolic blood pressure and heart rate values were significantly higher with articaine. Conclusions: Bupivacaine could be a valid alternative to articaine especially due to its early postoperative pain prevention ability.

A topical microemulsion for the prevention of allergic rhinitis symptoms: results of a randomized, controlled, double-blind, parallel group, multicentre, multinational clinical trial (Nares study)

Background: Since barrier protection measures to avoid contact with allergens are being increasingly developed, we assessed the clinical efficacy and tolerability of a topical nasal microemulsion made of glycerol esters in patients with allergic rhinitis. Methods: Randomized, controlled, double-blind, parallel group, multicentre, multinational clinical trial in which adult patients with allergic rhinitis or rhinoconjunctivitis due to sensitization to birch, grass or olive tree pollens received treatment with topical microemulsion or placebo during the pollen seasons. Efficacy variables included scores in the mini-RQLQ questionnaire, number and severity of nasal, ocular and lung signs and symptoms, need for symptomatic medications and patients" satisfaction with treatment. Adverse events were also recorded. Results: Demographic characteristics were homogeneous between groups and mini-RQLQ scores did not differ significantly at baseline (visit 1). From symptoms recorded in the diary cards, the ME group showed statistically significant better scores for nasal congestion (0.72 vs. 1.01; p = 0.017) and mean total nasal symptoms (0.7 vs. 0.9; p = 0.045). At visit 2 (pollen season), lower values were observed in the mini-RQLQ in the ME group, although there were no statistically significant differences between groups in both full analysis set (FAS) and patients completing treatment (PPS) populations. The results obtained in the nasal symptoms domain of the mini-RQLQ at visit 2 showed the highest difference (−0.43; 95% CI: -0.88 to 0.02) for the ME group in the FAS population. The topical microemulsion was safe and well tolerated and no major discomforts were observed. Satisfaction rating with the treatment was similar between the groups. Conclusions: The topical application of the microemulsion is a feasible and safe therapy in the prevention of allergic symptoms, particularly nasal congestion.

Referral from primary care to a physical activity programme: establishing long-term adherence? A randomized controlled trial. Rationale and study design

Background: Declining physical activity is associated with a rising burden of global disease. There is little evidence about effective ways to increase adherence to physical activity. Therefore, interventions are needed that produce sustained increases in adherence to physical activity and are cost-effective. The purpose is to assess the effectiveness of a primary care physical activity intervention in increasing adherence to physical activity in the general population seen in primary care. Method and design: Randomized controlled trial with systematic random sampling. A total of 424 subjects of both sexes will participate; all will be over the age of 18 with a low level of physical activity (according to the International Physical Activity Questionnaire, IPAQ), self-employed and from 9 Primary Healthcare Centres (PHC). They will volunteer to participate in a physical activity programme during 3 months (24 sessions; 2 sessions a week, 60 minutes per session). Participants from each PHC will be randomly allocated to an intervention (IG) and control group (CG). The following parameters will be assessed pre and post intervention in both groups: (1) health-related quality of life (SF-12), (2) physical activity stage of change (Prochaska's stages of change), (3) level of physical activity (IPAQ-short version), (4) change in perception of health (vignettes from the Cooperative World Organization of National Colleges, Academies, and Academic Associations of Family Physicians, COOP/WONCA), (5) level of social support for the physical activity practice (Social Support for Physical Activity Scale, SSPAS), and (6) control based on analysis (HDL, LDL and glycated haemoglobin).Participants' frequency of visits to the PHC will be registered over the six months before and after the programme. There will be a follow up in a face to face interview three, six and twelve months after the programme, with the reduced version of IPAQ, SF-12, SSPAS, and Prochaska's stages. Discussion: The pilot study showed the effectiveness of an enhanced low-cost, evidence-based intervention in increased physical activity and improved social support. If successful in demonstrating long-term improvements, this randomised controlled trial will be the first sustainable physical activity intervention based in primary care in our country to demonstrate longterm adherence to physical activity. Trial Registration: A service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Developed by the National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00714831.

The Effect of a Physical Activity Program on the Total Number of Primary Care Visits in Inactive Patients: A 15-Month Randomized Controlled Trial

Abstract Background: Effective promotion of exercise could result in substantial savings in healthcare cost expenses in terms of direct medical costs, such as the number of medical appointments. However, this is hampered by our limited knowledge of how to achieve sustained increases in physical activity. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of a Primary Health Care (PHC) based physical activity program in reducing the total number of visits to the healthcare center among inactive patients, over a 15-month period. Research Design: Randomized controlled trial. Subjects: Three hundred and sixty-two (n = 362) inactive patients suffering from at least one chronic condition were included. One hundred and eighty-three patients (n = 183; mean (SD); 68.3 (8.8) years; 118 women) were randomly allocated to the physical activity program (IG). One hundred and seventy-nine patients (n = 179; 67.2 (9.1) years; 106 women) were allocated to the control group (CG). The IG went through a three-month standardized physical activity program led by physical activity specialists and linked to community resources. Measures: The total number of medical appointments to the PHC, during twelve months before and after the program, was registered. Self-reported health status (SF-12 version 2) was assessed at baseline (month 0), at the end of the intervention (month 3), and at 12 months follow-up after the end of the intervention (month 15). Results: The IG had a significantly reduced number of visits during the 12 months after the intervention: 14.8 (8.5). The CG remained about the same: 18.2 (11.1) (P = .002). Conclusions: Our findings indicate that a 3-month physical activity program linked to community resources is a shortduration, effective and sustainable intervention in inactive patients to decrease rates of PHC visits. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00714831

Efficacy of a dilemma-focused intervention for unipolar depression: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial

Background Depression is one of the more severe and serious health problems because of its morbidity, disabling effects and for its societal and economic burden. Despite the variety of existing pharmacological and psychological treatments, most of the cases evolve with only partial remission, relapse and recurrence. Cognitive models have contributed significantly to the understanding of unipolar depression and its psychological treatment. However, success is only partial and many authors affirm the need to improve those models and also the treatment programs derived from them. One of the issues that requires further elaboration is the difficulty these patients experience in responding to treatment and in maintaining therapeutic gains across time without relapse or recurrence. Our research group has been working on the notion of cognitive conflict viewed as personal dilemmas according to personal construct theory. We use a novel method for identifying those conflicts using the repertory grid technique (RGT). Preliminary results with depressive patients show that about 90% of them have one or more of those conflicts. This fact might explain the blockage and the difficult progress of these patients, especially the more severe and/or chronic. These results justify the need for specific interventions focused on the resolution of these internal conflicts. This study aims to empirically test the hypothesis that an intervention focused on the dilemma(s) specifically detected for each patient will enhance the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression. Design A therapy manual for a dilemma-focused intervention will be tested using a randomized clinical trial by comparing the outcome of two treatment conditions: combined group CBT (eight, 2-hour weekly sessions) plus individual dilemma-focused therapy (eight, 1-hour weekly sessions) and CBT alone (eight, 2-hour group weekly sessions plus eight, 1-hour individual weekly sessions). Method Participants are patients aged over 18 years meeting diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder or dysthymic disorder, with a score of 19 or above on the Beck depression inventory, second edition (BDI-II) and presenting at least one cognitive conflict (implicative dilemma or dilemmatic construct) as assessed using the RGT. The BDI-II is the primary outcome measure, collected at baseline, at the end of therapy, and at 3- and 12-month follow-up; other secondary measures are also used. Discussion We expect that adding a dilemma-focused intervention to CBT will increase the efficacy of one of the more prestigious therapies for depression, thus resulting in a significant contribution to the psychological treatment of depression. Trial registration ISRCTN92443999; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01542957.

Safety of intramuscular influenza vaccine in patients receiving oral anticoagulation therapy: a single blinded multi-centre randomized controlled clinical trial

Influenza vaccines are recommended for administration by the intramuscular route. However, many physicians use the subcutaneous route for patients receiving an oral anticoagulant because this route is thought to induce fewer hemorrhagic side effects. Our aim is to assess the safety of intramuscular administration of influenza vaccine in patients on oral anticoagulation therapy. Methods: Design: Randomised, controlled, single blinded, multi-centre clinical trial. Setting: 4 primary care practices in Barcelona, Spain. Participants: 229 patients on oral anticoagulation therapy eligible for influenza vaccine during the 20032004 season. Interventions: intramuscular administration of influença vaccine in the experimental group (129 patients) compared to subcutaneous administration in the control group (100 patients). Primary outcome: change in the circumference of the arm at the site of injection at 24 hours. Secondary outcomes: appearance of local reactions and pain at 24 hours and at 10 days; change in INR (International Normalized Ratio) at 24 hours and at 10 days. Analysis was by intention to treat using the 95% confidence intervals of the proportions or mean differences. Results: Baseline variables in the two groups were similar. No major side effects or major haemorrhage during the follow-up period were reported. No significant differences were observed in the primary outcome between the two groups. The appearance of local adverse reactions was more frequent in the subcutaneous administration group (37,4% vs. 17,4%, 95% confidence interval of the difference 8,2% to 31,8%). Conclusion: This study shows that the intramuscular administration route of influenza vaccine in patients on anticoagulant therapy does not have more side effects than the subcutaneous administration route