AIM: To investigate the efficacy and safety of liduofen in the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee joint. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled, multi-centre study was adapted to compare the efficacy and safety between liduofen and Olfen-75 in 136 patients. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups: liduofen group which was received 75 mg (diclofenac) Liduofen injection (n=69) once a day for seven days and Olfen group which was received 75 mg (diclofenac) Olfen-75 injection (n=67) once a day for seven days. RESULTS: After the treatment, similar improvements for rest pain, pain on exercise, swelling of joint, pressing pain of joint, knee joint bend extend function measured using a 10 cm visual analogue scale was performed in two groups. In Olfen-75 group, the rate of efficacy was 62.69% in the 3rd day, 95.76% in the 5th day and 97.88% in the 7th day. While in liduofen group, the rate of efficacy was 57.97% in the 3rd day, 93.87% in the 5th day and 96.94% in the 7th day. In liduofen and Olfen-75 groups, the progressive rates were 56.72% and 55.07%, respectively. The total improvement rates were 89.85% and 92.54% respectively (P＞0.05), and the rates of side effects were 0% and 1.49%, respectively (P＞0.05). CONCLUSION: Liduofen is an effective and safty drug inthe treatment of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee joint. There is no significant difference on efficacy and safety between the two groups using liduofen and Olfen-75.

0.05 ). CONCLUSION: Liduofen is an effective and safty drug inthe treatment of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee joint. There is no significant difference on efficacy and safety between the two groups using liduofen and Olfen 75.

Objective To evaluate the cognitive level of proton pump inhibitors for the clinicians who prescribe these drugs often. Methods 10 cognitive latitudes for proton pump inhibitors were selected, which were receptor site, indication, indication of prophylaxis during perioperation, patients in contraindi-cated, high risk factors of stress ulcer, standard dose, daily dosing frequency, solvent selection for intrave-nous drip and main adverse reactions. Every cognitive latitude was assigned to points and one evaluation form was assigned 120 points. 175 clinicians participated the assessment voluntarily. Results Overall,the total average score is 58. 89. Each average score of 10 cognitive level is 10. 63, 1. 07, 6. 99, 5. 23, 3. 81, 11. 86, 11. 66, 3. 81, 7. 49 and 3. 81 respectively. The error rate is 10. 86％, 84. 57％, 45. 14％, 80. 00％, 59. 43％, 4. 00％, 2. 86％,80. 57％, 21. 71％ and 28. 00％ accordingly. Conclusions Over-all, the clinicians'cognitive level is low, while the senior doctors'are high in surgical prophylaxis;the physi-cians'are high in compatibility than surgeons ;the clinicians who used proton pump inhibitors ( PPI) more frequently are high in solvent selection for intravenous drip.

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are the main treatments for epilepsy. Patients with epilepsy will benefit a lot from AEDs. However, AEDs also have a variety of adverse drug effects, including aggressive behavior (AB). It will have important clinical significance of identifying and treating correctly AB since of its dangers, caused by AEDs. This article will review the clinical features, susceptibility factors and mechanisms of AB induced by AEDs.

OBJECTIVE To analyze th e evaluation methods of the skill ，adherence and effectiveness of medication in bronchial asthma （hereinafter referred to as “asthma”）patients from a pharmacist perspective ，and to provide reference for pharmacists to carry out clinical intervention researches and management of asthma patients. METHODS Referring to diagnosis and treatment guidelines ，evidence-based medicine literature and clinical practice experience ，the evaluation methods of asthma patients ’ medication with clinical value were expounded from three aspects including medication skill （inhalation technology ），adherence and effectiveness. RESULTS Inhalation technique rating form was an important evaluation method of medication skills in asthma patients. Medication adherence could be evaluated by Morisky Medication Adherence Scale or the Medication Adherence Report Scale for Asthma. Effectiveness evaluation methods contained direct evaluation indexes （such as clinical manifestations ，situation of acute exacerbation and relieving medication ，examination indexes such as pulmonary function indexes and fractional concentration of exhaled nitric oxide ）and indirect evaluation tools （i.e. various scales ，including Asthma Control Test ，Children-Asthma Control Test，the Test for Respiratory and Asthma Control in Kids ，asthma related quality of life scales ，etc.）CONCLUSIONS The combination of the evaluation methods of medication skill ， adherence and effectiveness contributes to assessing the pharmacotherapy effect of asthma patients. Pharmacists should apply and perfect these evaluation methods in practice ，so as to conduct better pharmaceutical intervention on asthma patients.