<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2d1 20170631//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="1.0" article-type="healthcare" lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">IJCRR</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">I Journ Cur Res Re</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>International Journal of Current Research and Review</journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">I Journ Cur Res Re</abbrev-journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2231-2196</issn><issn pub-type="opub">0975-5241</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Radiance Research Academy</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">1519</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi"/><article-id pub-id-type="doi-url"/><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>COMPARATIVE ANXIOLYTIC ACTIVITY OF VARIOUS DRUGS IN EXPERIMENTAL MODELS OF RATS&#13;
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Vittha</surname><given-names>Kedare Rahul</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Ghongane</surname><given-names>B.B.</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Wagh</surname><given-names>R.J.</given-names></name></contrib></contrib-group><volume>)</volume><issue/><fpage>77</fpage><lpage>85</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>This article is copyright of Popeye Publishing, 2009</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2009</copyright-year><license license-type="open-access" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><license-p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) Licence. You may share and adapt the material, but must give appropriate credit to the source, provide a link to the licence, and indicate if changes were made.</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>Objective: The aim of present work was to evaluate the anxiolytic efficacy of traditional anxiolytics along with antihistaminic, antipsychotic and analgesic in rats. Materials and Methods: The elevated plus maze model (EPMM) , open field test(OFT) and novelty induced hypophagia model(NIHM) were used to assess the effect on anxiety. The activity of Buspirone, Hydroxyzine, Haloperidol, Fluoxetine and Pethidine was compared with Diazepam, a standard anxiolytic drug. Results: Diazepam produced maximum anxiolysis in all anxiety models. The high dose Buspirone (5 mg/kg) was more effective compared than the low and medium dose (1.25mg/kg, 2.5mg/kg).) which showed significant increase in the time spent and number of entries in open arm in EPMM. The same doses of Buspirone showed significant increased in number of ambulations and number of rearing in OFT. The high dose (5 mg/kg) of Buspirone showed significantly decreased latency in NIHM. Overall, the activity of high dose of Buspirone was significantly less when compared with Diazepam but significantly more when compared to Hydroxyzine, Haloperidol, Fluoxetine and Pethidine. Conclusion: The result of the present study showed that Diazepam produced maximum anxiolysis in all anxiety models. Buspirone (high dose), Fluoxetine, Hydroxyzine, Haloperidol and Pethidine have more significant anxiolytic activity as compared to control group in elevated plus maze and novelty induced hypophagia test. In open field test Buspirone(high dose), Hydroxyzine Fluoxetine, Haloperidol and Pethidine have more significant anxiolytic activity as compared to control group.&#13;
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Anxiolytics</kwd><kwd> Diazepam</kwd><kwd> Buspirone </kwd><kwd> EPM model</kwd><kwd> OFT </kwd><kwd> Novelty induced hypophagia</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front></article>
