Sally is a 50-year-old female who has been a jogger for several years. She has recently been diagnosed with osteoarthritis. She has been taking ibuprofen for 3 months but states that “it does not help” and hurts her stomach. The health care provider prescribes celecoxib (Celebrex) 100 mg orally twice a day. Post should be at least 500 words, formatted and cited in current APA style with support from at least 2 academic sources. Purchase the answer to view it


Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent form of arthritis, affecting millions of individuals worldwide, particularly those aged 50 years and above (Bijlsma et al., 2011). This condition involves the progressive degeneration of joint cartilage, leading to symptoms such as pain, stiffness, and reduced mobility (Hochberg et al., 2012). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are often prescribed as the first line of treatment for OA to manage pain and inflammation. However, their use is associated with various adverse effects, including gastrointestinal (GI) complications (Scott and Kingsley, 2006). In this case, Sally, a 50-year-old female jogger recently diagnosed with OA, experiences inadequate pain relief and GI discomfort from her current NSAID (ibuprofen) treatment. As a result, her healthcare provider prescribes celecoxib (Celebrex) as an alternative. This paper aims to discuss the appropriateness and potential benefits of celecoxib as a treatment option for Sally, considering the available evidence and guidelines.

Background on Celecoxib

Celecoxib is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor, a class of NSAIDs that specifically target the COX-2 enzyme responsible for inflammation and pain (Bombardier et al., 2000). Unlike traditional NSAIDs such as ibuprofen, which inhibit both COX-1 and COX-2 enzymes, celecoxib selectively inhibits COX-2 without significantly affecting COX-1 (Wang and Reddy, 2014). This selectivity is attributed to the chemical structure of celecoxib, allowing for reduced interference with the protective functions of COX-1 on the GI tract (Bombardier et al., 2000). By inhibiting COX-2, celecoxib effectively reduces pain and inflammation associated with OA, while theoretically minimizing the risk of GI complications.

Effectiveness and Safety Profile

Numerous studies have investigated the effectiveness of celecoxib in the treatment of OA-related pain. A systematic review by Zhang et al. (2017) analyzed data from 53 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving over 17,000 OA patients. The review found that celecoxib was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing pain and improving physical function, with greater effect sizes observed at higher doses. Moreover, a meta-analysis by Nissen et al. (2016) comparing the cardiovascular safety of celecoxib with other NSAIDs in patients with arthritis found that celecoxib had a similar cardiovascular risk profile to naproxen but was associated with a lower risk compared to non-naproxen NSAIDs. These findings support the efficacy and safety profile of celecoxib in the management of OA.

Consideration for Sally’s Case

Given her complaint of inadequate pain relief and GI discomfort caused by ibuprofen, the decision to switch to celecoxib seems appropriate. The selective COX-2 inhibition of celecoxib may provide better pain control while reducing the risk of GI adverse effects. Higher doses of celecoxib have been shown to offer greater efficacy (Zhang et al., 2017), and thus, starting at the prescribed dose of 100 mg orally twice a day is justifiable. However, Sally’s healthcare provider should closely monitor her response to treatment and titrate the dose if necessary, as individual patients may require adjustments due to variations in their response and tolerability (Hochberg et al., 2012).

The concerns regarding the cardiovascular safety of selective COX-2 inhibitors, including celecoxib, should also be addressed. Although the meta-analysis by Nissen et al. (2016) suggests a relatively lower cardiovascular risk compared to other non-naproxen NSAIDs, the healthcare provider should evaluate Sally’s cardiovascular health, including any comorbidities and concurrent medications, before initiating celecoxib treatment. This assessment can help determine if the benefits of celecoxib outweigh any potential risks and guide the provider in making an informed decision.


In conclusion, celecoxib appears to be a suitable alternative treatment option for Sally, considering its selective COX-2 inhibition and potential benefits in terms of pain relief and reduced GI adverse effects. Relying on evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses, celecoxib has demonstrated effectiveness in managing OA-related pain and a comparable cardiovascular safety profile to traditional NSAIDs. However, it is crucial for Sally’s healthcare provider to evaluate her individual circumstances and closely monitor her response to treatment to ensure optimal outcomes and minimize potential risks.