{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03321167883211679, 'fraction_numerical': 0.032116788321167884, 'mean_word_length': 4.958695652173913, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Intermittent prophylaxis of recurrent febrile seizures with clobazam versus diazepam.

Febrile seizures are the most common type of seizure among children that can be prevented by using prophylactic drugs like Clobazam and Diazepam. The present prospective study was conducted in the Department of Pediatrics, Mymensingh Medical College Hospital and Community Based Medical College Hospital, Bangladesh over a period of 1 year from July 2012 to June 2013 to compare the effectiveness of intermittent Clobazam versus Diazepam therapy in preventing the recurrence of febrile seizures and assessed adverse effects of each drug. A total of 65 patients (32 children administered Clobazam and rest 33 children received Diazepam) of simple and complex febrile seizures aged 6 months to 5 years of both sexes were the study population. Data were collected by interview of the patients, clinical examination and laboratory investigations using the research instrument. Data were analyzed by using Chi-square (χ2) Test, Student's 't' Test and Fisher's Exact Test. For all analytical tests, the level of significance was set at 0.05 and p<0.05 was considered significant. The proportion of patients was higher between age 12-36 months and male was predominant in the both Clobazam and Diazepam groups. Over 31% of patients in Clobazam group who experienced episode of fever within 3 months, 40.6% within 6 months and 9.4% within 9 months compared to 36.4% in Diazepam group within 3 months, 45.5% within 6 months & 12.1% within 9 months after discharge from the hospital. Three (9.4%) patients in Clobazam group and 7(21.3%) in Diazepam group who experienced febrile convulsion during the follow up period. From the data adverse effects within 3 and 6 months experienced by the patient's drowsiness, sedation and ataxia were higher in Diazepam group than those in Clobazam group. However, within 9 months lethargy and irritability were somewhat higher in Clobazam group than those in Diazepam group. The mean duration of hospitalization was significantly higher in Diazepam group compared to Clobazam group (6.0±1.0 vs. 4.6±0.08 days, P<0.001). Seven (21.2%) out of 33 children with febrile seizures in Diazepam group had a history of recurrent seizures, whereas 3(9.4%) of 32 children in the Clobazam group. The risks of recurrent febrile seizure in the Diazepam group was 2.6 times greater compared to those in the Clobazam group (P=0.186). The result indicates that Clobazam is safe, efficacious, requires less frequent dosing and has less adverse effects such as drowsiness, sedation, ataxia and irritability as compared to Diazepam. So, Clobazam may be an alternative to Diazepam given intermittently for prevention of recurrent febrile seizures.