Haloperidol for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation)

Effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for severe agitation in real-world emergency settings: protocol of individual-participant-data network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Severe psychomotor agitation and aggression often require immediate pharmacological intervention, but clear evidence-based recommendations for choosing among the multiple options are lacking. To address this gap, we plan a systematic review and individual-participant-data network meta-analysis to investigate their comparative effectiveness in real-world emergency settings with increased precision.

METHODS

We will include randomized controlled trials investigating intramuscular or intravenous pharmacological interventions, as monotherapy or in combination, in adults with severe psychomotor agitation irrespective of the underlying diagnosis and requiring rapid tranquilization in general or psychiatric emergency settings. We will exclude studies before 2002, those focusing on specific reasons for agitation and placebo-controlled trials to avoid concerns related to the transitivity assumption and potential selection biases. We will search for eligible studies in BIOSIS, CENTRAL, CINAHL Plus, Embase, LILACS, MEDLINE via Ovid, PubMed, ProQuest, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO-ICTRP. Individual-participant data will be requested from the study authors and harmonized into a uniform format, and aggregated data will also be extracted from the studies. At least two independent reviewers will conduct the study selection, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment using RoB 2, and applicability evaluation using the RITES tool. The primary outcome will be the number of patients achieving adequate sedation within 30 min after treatment, with secondary outcomes including the need for additional interventions and adverse events, using odds ratios as the effect size. If enough individual-participant data will be collected, we will synthesize them in a network meta-regression model within a Bayesian framework, incorporating study- and participant-level characteristics to explore potential sources of heterogeneity. In cases where individual-participant data are unavailable, potential data availability bias will be explored, and models allowing for the inclusion of studies reporting only aggregated data will be considered. We will assess the confidence in the evidence using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) approach.

DISCUSSION

This individual-participant-data network meta-analysis aims to provide a fine-tuned synthesis of the evidence on the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for severe psychomotor agitation in real-world emergency settings. The findings from this study can greatly be provided clearer evidence-based guidance on the most effective treatments.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023402365.

Haloperidol (oral) versus olanzapine (oral) for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is often a severe and disabling psychiatric disorder. Antipsychotics remain the mainstay of psychotropic treatment for people with psychosis. In limited resource and humanitarian contexts, it is key to have several options for beneficial, low-cost antipsychotics, which require minimal monitoring. We wanted to compare oral haloperidol, as one of the most available antipsychotics in these settings, with a second-generation antipsychotic, olanzapine.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical benefits and harms of haloperidol compared to olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia study-based register of trials, which is based on monthly searches of CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, ISRCTN, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed and WHO ICTRP. We screened the references of all included studies. We contacted relevant authors of trials for additional information where clarification was required or where data were incomplete. The register was last searched on 14 January 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing haloperidol with olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Our main outcomes of interest were clinically important change in global state, relapse, clinically important change in mental state, extrapyramidal side effects, weight increase, clinically important change in quality of life and leaving the study early due to adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently evaluated and extracted data. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial or harmful outcome (NNTB or NNTH) with 95% CI. For continuous data, we estimated mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs. For all included studies, we assessed risk of bias (RoB 1) and we used the GRADE approach to create a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 68 studies randomising 9132 participants. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in clinically important change in global state (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.02; 6 studies, 3078 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in relapse (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.02; 7 studies, 1499 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in overall mental state compared to olanzapine (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.81; 13 studies, 1210 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every eight people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this improvement. The evidence suggests that haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects compared to olanzapine (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.28 to 5.02; 14 studies, 3290 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every three people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one additional person would experience extrapyramidal side effects. For weight gain, the evidence suggests that there may be a large reduction in the risk with haloperidol compared to olanzapine (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.61; 18 studies, 4302 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 10 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience weight increase. A single study suggests that haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in quality of life compared to olanzapine (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.91; 828 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every nine people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience clinically important improvement in quality of life. Haloperidol may result in an increase in the incidence of leaving the study early due to adverse effects compared to olanzapine (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.47; 21 studies, 5047 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 22 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this outcome. Thirty otherwise relevant studies and several endpoints from 14 included studies could not be evaluated due to inconsistencies and poor transparency of several parameters. Furthermore, even within studies that were included, it was often not possible to use data for the same reasons. Risk of bias differed substantially for different outcomes and the certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to low. The most common risks of bias leading to downgrading of the evidence were blinding (performance bias) and selective reporting (reporting bias).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the certainty of the evidence was low to very low for the main outcomes in this review, making it difficult to draw reliable conclusions. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in terms of clinically important global state and relapse. Olanzapine may result in a slightly greater overall clinically important change in mental state and in a clinically important change in quality of life. Different side effect profiles were noted: haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects and olanzapine in a large increase in weight gain. The drug of choice needs to take into account side effect profiles and the preferences of the individual. These findings and the recent inclusion of olanzapine alongside haloperidol in the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines should increase the likelihood of it becoming more easily available in low- and middle- income countries, thereby improving choice and providing a greater ability to respond to side effects for people with lived experience of schizophrenia. There is a need for additional research using appropriate and equivalent dosages of these drugs. Some of this research needs to be done in low- and middle-income settings and should actively seek to account for factors relevant to these. Research on antipsychotics needs to be person-centred and prioritise factors that are of interest to people with lived experience of schizophrenia.

Prescribing pattern of antipsychotics for patients with schizophrenia using the total daily dose online tool

This study aimed to investigate the prescribing pattern of antipsychotic medications for schizophrenia using the British National Formulary total daily dose (TDD) online tool. We analysed data from the electronic medical records at King Khalid University Hospital (KKUH) of 272 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia who were prescribed both typical and atypical antipsychotic medications. The results showed that aripiprazole was the most commonly prescribed antipsychotic drug, followed by haloperidol then risperidone. The TDD online tool was used to calculate the TDD of each prescribed antipsychotic medication. Most patients were prescribed doses within the recommended range for each medication, although some were prescribed doses above or below the recommended range. Moreover, a high recommended TDD was associated with the combined use of antipsychotics rather than monotherapy. Additionally, high TDD levels were associated with the following antipsychotics: haloperidol, olanzapine, paliperidone, and quetiapine. Our findings highlight the importance of using evidence-based tools such as the TDD online tool to guide prescribing practices and ensure optimal dosing of antipsychotic medications for patients with schizophrenia.

Use of a Novel Standardized Administration Protocol Reduces Agitation Pro Re Nata (PRN) Medication Requirements: The Birmingham Agitation Management (BAM) Initiative

BACKGROUND

Agitation management is a principal challenge on inpatient psychiatric units. Overreliance on common prescribing strategies of pro re nata (PRN) medication administration is problematic, given the tendencies to have overlapping or unclear indications.

OBJECTIVE

Piloted project to determine whether a standardized protocol for agitation intervention may reduce PRN medication administration.

METHODS

The Birmingham Agitation Management (BAM) interdisciplinary team uniquely connected the Brøset Violence Checklist (BVC) for assessment of agitation severity to a standardized PRN medication order set. Nurses on the piloted unit were trained on how to score the BVC and administer medications. Patients were assessed by the BVC every 4 hours and, based on their score, would receive no medication, low-dose benzodiazepine, high-dose benzodiazepine, or high-dose benzodiazepine plus antipsychotic. The primary end point compared the number of PRNs administered after novel protocol implementation with a retrospective cohort. Secondary measures included analysis of medication-related effects, seclusion, and physical restraint rates.

RESULTS

377 patients were included in the final analyses (184 pre-BAM, 193 BAM intervention group). No significant differences were seen in patient characteristics between groups. The total number of PRNs administered decreased by 42.5%, with both the mean and median number of administrations decreasing significantly (95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.68-5.75]; P < 0.001). A trend was noted between the number of PRNs administered and seclusion rates, but did not reach statistical significance (95% CI = [-7.28 to 60.31]; P = 0.124).

CONCLUSIONS

In seemingly the first initiative of its kind, we found that a standardized agitation management protocol can help decrease the total number of PRN administrations for agitation without worsening of restraint rates and may possibly reduce the risk of adverse effects. These results require validation in specific, larger populations.

Potentially Inappropriate Medication at Admission and at Discharge: A Geriatric Study in an Internal Medicine Service in Portugal

Aging is associated with an increase in the prevalence of chronic diseases and polypharmacy, and with the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). This study aimed to analyze the variation in PIMs from hospital admission to discharge. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on inpatients of an internal medicine service. According to the Beers criteria, 80.7% of the patients had been prescribed at least one PIM at admission and 87.2% at discharge; metoclopramide was the most-prescribed PIM from admission to discharge, and acetylsalicylic acid was the most-deprescribed one. According to the STOPP criteria, 49.4% of patients had been prescribed at least one PIM at admission and 62.2% at discharge; quetiapine was the most-prescribed PIM from admission to discharge, and captopril was the most-deprescribed one. According to the EU(7)-PIM list, 51.3% of patients had been prescribed at least one PIM at admission and 70.3% at discharge, and bisacodyl was the most-prescribed PIM from admission to discharge and propranolol the most-deprescribed one. It was found that the number of PIMs at discharge was higher than at admission, suggesting the need to develop a guide with adapted criteria to be applied in an internal medicine service.

Pharmacological strategies for the management of the antisocial personality disorder

INTRODUCTION

Antisocial personality disorder (AsPD) is a pervasive pattern of violation of others' rights, related to the concept of psychopathy. AsPD is stable over time from adolescence, with evidence of conduct disorder (CD) before 15 years. DSM-5 included a specifier 'with limited prosocial emotions' (LPE), which characterizes adolescents with higher developmental vulnerability to develop AsPD. Despite being relatively frequent with considerable societal impact, AsPD is a difficult-to-treat condition with high comorbidity rates and poor evidence for effective pharmacological interventions.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a narrative review and searched PubMed up to September 2022. We included RCTs and naturalistic studies evaluating pharmacological interventions on AsPD in adults, including those with comorbid substance use disorder or psychopathic traits. Evidence in youths with CD, callous-unemotional (CU) traits and aggression were also reviewed, exploring the role of CU traits as moderators of response.

EXPERT OPINION

Psychosocial interventions are the first option, with possible improvement of CU traits, beyond behavioral and affective symptoms, particularly if implemented early during development. Limited information, based on low-quality studies, supports the pharmacological options. Second-generation antipsychotics, lithium, anti-epileptic drugs, and stimulants are first-line medications, according to different target symptoms. Developmental pathways including ADHD suggest a specific role of psychostimulants.

Fifty years of experience with loxapine for the rapid non-coercive tranquilization of acute behavioral disturbances in schizophrenia patients, and beyond

INTRODUCTION

Acute behavioral disturbances in psychosis, including agitation, comprise a heterogeneous group of manifestations varying in intensity and duration they last for. They require rapid, non-coercive treatments ranging from verbal de-escalation to the calming effect of pharmacological agents. The treatment goals are reduction of patient suffering and prevention of disease deterioration. Stabilizing rather than sedating is preferred to ensure improved compliance and a stronger therapeutic alliance. Furthermore, animal pharmacology and clinical studies on agitation reveal the robust calming and anxiolytic properties of loxapine.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers the pharmacological and clinical history of loxapine along with research developments. It emphasizes the advantages of its multiple formulations ranging from injectable forms and tablets to orally inhaled forms to attain rapid and fine-tuned tranquilization.

EXPERT OPINION

Rapid tranquillization is achieved within 2-6 hours using liquid orally-consumed loxapine, and within an hour or less with its IM or orally inhaled forms. Loxapine has been adopted in the management of a wide range of acute disturbances, such as agitation in psychosis. In the context of personalized medicine, key cellular and molecular elements of the schizophrenia phenotype were recently shown to be improved with loxapine.

Substance Abuse Associated with Aggressive/Violent Behaviors in Psychiatric Outpatients and Related Psychotropic Prescription

Psychiatric disorders with substance abuse are considered the leading causes of most violent and aggressive behaviors in the general population. This study was aimed to assess the impact of substance abuse and the therapeutic approaches adopted by psychiatrists in aggressive vs non-aggressive outpatients (n = 400) attending community-based psychiatric services and recruited over a 3-year period. Clinical and therapeutic variables were collected from medical records and the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) was used to assess any aggressive/violent behavior. Violent behaviors were significantly higher in alcohol and substance abusers compared to non-abusers (p < 0.01), except for heroin abusers. Mean weighted MOAS score was significantly higher in patients taking antipsychotics (p < 0.005). The administration of Haloperidol, Zuclopenthixol, and Clozapine was more frequent in aggressive than in non-aggressive patients. The most frequently administered drug in these patients was Haloperidol (23.91%), with a higher mean daily dosage in violent vs non-violent patients. Our results confirm the well-established relationship between substance abuse and violent behaviors in psychiatric inpatients also within outpatient community services. Observed rates of most frequently prescribed antipsychotics to aggressive patients did not show any preference for newer generation compounds, with clinicians operating in the community setting likely being in need for further evidence and specific training to support their treatment choice.

Mechanistic/mammalian target of rapamycin and side effects of antipsychotics: insights into mechanisms and implications for therapy

Antipsychotic pharmacotherapy has been widely recommended as the standard of care for the treatment of acute schizophrenia and psychotic symptoms of other psychiatric disorders. However, there are growing concerns regarding antipsychotic-induced side effects, including weight gain, metabolic syndrome (MetS), and extrapyramidal motor disorders, which not only decrease patient compliance, but also predispose to diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. To date, most studies and reviews on the mechanisms of antipsychotic-induced metabolic side effects have focused on central nervous system mediation of appetite and food intake. However, disturbance in glucose and lipid metabolism, and hepatic steatosis induced by antipsychotic drugs might precede weight gain and MetS. Recent studies have demonstrated that the mechanistic/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway plays a critical regulatory role in the pathophysiology of antipsychotic drug-induced disorders of hepatic glucose and lipid metabolism. Furthermore, antipsychotic drugs promote striatal mTOR pathway activation that contributes to extrapyramidal motor side effects. Although recent findings have advanced the understanding of the role of the mTOR pathway in antipsychotic-induced side effects, few reviews have been conducted on this emerging topic. In this review, we synthesize key findings by focusing on the roles of the hepatic and striatal mTOR pathways in the pathogenesis of metabolic and extrapyramidal side effects, respectively. We further discuss the potential therapeutic benefits of normalizing excessive mTOR pathway activation with mTOR specific inhibitors. A deeper understanding of pathogenesis may inform future intervention strategies using the pharmacological or genetic inhibitors of mTOR to prevent and manage antipsychotic-induced side effects.

Managing acute agitation and aggression in the world of drug shortages

Acute agitation and aggression create safety risks for both patients and staff, often leading to psychiatric emergencies. Quick and appropriate treatment is necessary to achieve safe and effective outcomes. Unfortunately, there are several factors that hinder timely interventions, such as medication shortages and delay in staff preparedness. Ultimately, the goal of managing acute agitation and aggression in the clinical setting is to de-escalate the situation and prevent harm to patients and staff. This article will explore useful interventions in realizing treatment goals for the management of agitation and aggression in adults while navigating limitations faced in practice.

Prescription of Potentially Inappropriate Medication in Older Inpatients of an Internal Medicine Ward: Concordance and Overlap Among the EU(7)-PIM List and Beers and STOPP Criteria

Background: Age-related comorbidities prone older adults to polypharmacy and to an increased risk of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use. This work aims to analyze the concordance and overlap among the EU(7)-PIM list, 2019 Beers criteria, and Screening Tool of Older Person’s Prescriptions (STOPP) version 2 criteria and also to analyze the prevalence of PIM.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on older inpatients of an internal medicine ward. Demographic, clinical, and pharmacological data were collected, during March 2020. After PIM identification by the EU(7)-PIM list, Beers criteria, and STOPP v2 criteria, the concordance and overlap between criteria were analyzed. A descriptive analysis was performed, and all the results with a p-value lower than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results: A total of 616 older patients were included in the study whose median age was 85 (Q1–Q3) (78–89) years. Most of the older patients were male (51.6%), and the median (Q1–Q3) number of days of hospitalization was 17 (13–22) days. According to the EU(7)-PIM list, Beers criteria, and STOPP criteria, 79.7, 92.0, and 76.5% of older adults, respectively, used at least one PIM. A poor concordance (<63.4%) among criteria was observed. An association between PIM and the number of prescribed medicines was found in all applied criteria. Moreover, an association between the number of PIMs and diagnoses of endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic diseases, mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders, and circulatory system diseases and days of hospitalization was observed according to Beers criteria, and that with diseases of the circulatory system and musculoskeletal system and connective tissue was observed according to STOPP criteria.

Conclusion: Despite the poor concordance between the EU(7)-PIM list, 2019 Beers, and STOPP v2 criteria, this work highlights the need for more studies in inpatients to develop strategies to facilitate the identification of PIM to decrease the high prevalence of PIM in hospitalized patients. The poor concordance among criteria also highlights the need to develop new tools adapting the existing criteria to medical ward inpatients.

The Management of Psychomotor Agitation Associated with Schizophrenia or Bipolar Disorder: A Brief Review

The early and correct assessment of psychomotor agitation (PMA) is essential to ensure prompt intervention by healthcare professionals to improve the patient’s condition, protect healthcare staff, and facilitate future management. Proper training for recognizing and managing agitation in all care settings is desirable to improve patient outcomes. The best approach is one that is ethical, non-invasive, and respectful of the patient’s dignity. When deemed necessary, pharmacological interventions must be administered rapidly and avoid producing an excessive state of sedation, except in cases of severe and imminent danger to the patient or others. The purpose of this brief review is to raise awareness about best practices for the management of PMA in emergency care situations and consider the role of new pharmacological interventions in patients with agitation associated with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia.

Quetiapine and Wolff-Parkinson-White Syndrome

Quetiapine is occasionally associated with cardiovascular adverse effects such as QTc prolongation. QTc prolongation is a side effect that requires monitoring in order to avoid more serious cardiac complications. One particular understudied area is the potential for antipsychotics to elicit electroconduction abnormalities in patients with Wolff-Parkinson-White (WPW) Syndrome. In the present report, we describe a case of quetiapine overdose in a patient with WPW.

Which Emergent Medication Should I Give Next? Repeated Use of Emergent Medications to Treat Acute Agitation

Agitation is a common symptom encountered among patients treated in psychiatric emergency settings. While there are many guidelines available for initial management of the acutely agitated patient, there is a notable dearth of guidelines that delineate recommended approaches to the acutely agitated patient in whom an initial medication intervention has failed. This manuscript aims to fill this gap by examining evidence available in the literature and providing clinical algorithms suggested by the authors for sequential medication administration in patients with persistent acute agitation in psychiatric emergency settings. We discuss risk factors for medication-related adverse events and provide options for patients who are able to take oral medications and for patients who require parenteral intervention. We conclude with a discussion of the current need for well-designed studies that examine sequential medication options in patients with persistent acute agitation.

The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) kinase mediates haloperidol-induced cataleptic behavior

The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is a ubiquitously expressed serine/threonine kinase protein complex (mTORC1 or mTORC2) that orchestrates diverse functions ranging from embryonic development to aging. However, its brain tissue-specific roles remain less explored. Here, we have identified that the depletion of the mTOR gene in the mice striatum completely prevented the extrapyramidal motor side effects (catalepsy) induced by the dopamine 2 receptor (D2R) antagonist haloperidol, which is the most widely used typical antipsychotic drug. Conversely, a lack of striatal mTOR in mice did not affect catalepsy triggered by the dopamine 1 receptor (D1R) antagonist SCH23390. Along with the lack of cataleptic effects, the administration of haloperidol in mTOR mutants failed to increase striatal phosphorylation levels of ribosomal protein pS6 (S235/236) as seen in control animals. To confirm the observations of the genetic approach, we used a pharmacological method and determined that the mTORC1 inhibitor rapamycin has a profound influence upon post-synaptic D2R-dependent functions. We consistently found that pretreatment with rapamycin entirely prevented (in a time-dependent manner) the haloperidol-induced catalepsy, and pS6K (T389) and pS6 (S235/236) signaling upregulation, in wild-type mice. Collectively, our data indicate that striatal mTORC1 blockade may offer therapeutic benefits with regard to the prevention of D2R-dependent extrapyramidal motor side effects of haloperidol in psychiatric illness.

Improving the management of acutely agitated patients in the emergency department through implementation of Project BETA (Best Practices in the Evaluation and Treatment of Agitation)

Agitated patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) can escalate to aggressive and violent behaviors with the potential for injury to themselves, ED staff, and others. Agitation is a nonspecific symptom that may be caused by or result in a life-threatening condition. Project BETA (Best Practices in the Evaluation and Treatment of Agitation) is a compilation of the best evidence and consensus recommendations developed by emergency medicine and psychiatry experts in behavioral emergencies to improve our approach to the acutely agitated patient. These recommendations focus on verbal de-escalation as a first-line treatment for agitation; pharmacotherapy that treats the most likely etiology of the agitation; appropriate psychiatric evaluation and treatment of associated medical conditions; and minimization of physical restraint/seclusion. Implementation of Project BETA in the ED can improve our ability to manage a patient's agitation and reduce the number of physical assaults on ED staff. This article summarizes the BETA guidelines and recent supporting literature for managing the acutely agitated patient in the ED followed by a discussion of how a large county hospital integrated these recommendations into daily practice.

Rage Against the Machine: Advancing the study of aggression ethology via machine learning

RATIONALE

Aggression, comorbid with neuropsychiatric disorders, exhibits with diverse clinical presentations and places a significant burden on patients, caregivers, and society. This diversity is observed because aggression is a complex behavior that can be ethologically demarcated as either appetitive (rewarding) or reactive (defensive), each with its own behavioral characteristics, functionality, and neural basis that may transition from adaptive to maladaptive depending on genetic and environmental factors. There has been a recent surge in the development of preclinical animal models for studying appetitive aggression-related behaviors and identifying the neural mechanisms guiding their progression and expression. However, adoption of these procedures is often impeded by the arduous task of manually scoring complex social interactions. Manual observations are generally susceptible to observer drift, long analysis times, and poor inter-rater reliability, and are further incompatible with the sampling frequencies required of modern neuroscience methods.

OBJECTIVES

In this review, we discuss recent advances in the preclinical study of appetitive aggression in mice, paired with our perspective on the potential for machine learning techniques in producing automated, robust scoring of aggressive social behavior. We discuss critical considerations for implementing valid computer classifications within behavioral pharmacological studies.

KEY RESULTS

Open-source automated classification platforms can match or exceed the performance of human observers while removing the confounds of observer drift, bias, and inter-rater reliability. Furthermore, unsupervised approaches can identify previously uncharacterized aggression-related behavioral repertoires in model species.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Advances in open-source computational approaches hold promise for overcoming current manual annotation caveats while also introducing and generalizing computational neuroethology to the greater behavioral neuroscience community. We propose that currently available open-source approaches are sufficient for overcoming the main limitations preventing wide adoption of machine learning within the context of preclinical aggression behavioral research.

Pharmacological treatment of hyperactive delirium in people with COVID-19: rethinking conventional approaches

People with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) might have several risk factors for delirium, which could in turn notably worsen the prognosis. Although pharmacological approaches for delirium are debated, haloperidol and other first-generation antipsychotics are frequently employed, particularly for hyperactive presentations. However, the use of these conventional treatments could be limited in people with COVID-19, due to the underlying medical condition and the risk of drug-drug interactions with anti-COVID treatments. On these premises, we carried out a rapid review in order to identify possible alternative medications for this particular population. By searching PubMed and the Cochrane Library, we selected the most updated systematic reviews of randomised trials on the pharmacological treatment of delirium in both intensive and non-intensive care settings, and on the treatment of agitation related to acute psychosis or dementia. We identified medications performing significantly better than placebo or haloperidol as the reference treatment in each population considered, and assessed the strength of association according to validated criteria. In addition, we collected data on other relevant clinical elements (i.e. common adverse events, drug-drug interactions with COVID-19 medications, daily doses) and regulatory elements (i.e. therapeutic indications, contra-indications, available formulations). A total of 10 systematic reviews were included. Overall, relatively few medications showed benefits over placebo in the four selected populations. As compared with placebo, significant benefits emerged for quetiapine and dexmedetomidine in intensive care unit (ICU) settings, and for none of the medications in non-ICU settings. Considering also data from indirect populations (agitation related to acute psychosis or dementia), aripiprazole, quetiapine and risperidone showed a potential benefit in two or three different populations. Despite limitations related to the rapid review methodology and the use of data from indirect populations, the evidence retrieved can pragmatically support treatment choices of frontline practitioners involved in the COVID-19 outbreak, and indicate future research directions for the treatment of delirium in particularly vulnerable populations.

Safety of psychotropic medications in people with COVID-19: evidence review and practical recommendations

BACKGROUND

The novel coronavirus pandemic calls for a rapid adaptation of conventional medical practices to meet the evolving needs of such vulnerable patients. People with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) may frequently require treatment with psychotropic medications, but are at the same time at higher risk for safety issues because of the complex underlying medical condition and the potential interaction with medical treatments.

METHODS

In order to produce evidence-based practical recommendations on the optimal management of psychotropic medications in people with COVID-19, an international, multi-disciplinary working group was established. The methodology of the WHO Rapid Advice Guidelines in the context of a public health emergency and the principles of the AGREE statement were followed. Available evidence informing on the risk of respiratory, cardiovascular, infective, hemostatic, and consciousness alterations related to the use of psychotropic medications, and drug-drug interactions between psychotropic and medical treatments used in people with COVID-19, was reviewed and discussed by the working group.

RESULTS

All classes of psychotropic medications showed potentially relevant safety risks for people with COVID-19. A set of practical recommendations was drawn in order to inform frontline clinicians on the assessment of the anticipated risk of psychotropic-related unfavorable events, and the possible actions to take in order to effectively manage this risk, such as when it is appropriate to avoid, withdraw, switch, or adjust the dose of the medication.

CONCLUSIONS

The present evidence-based recommendations will improve the quality of psychiatric care in people with COVID-19, allowing an appropriate management of the medical condition without worsening the psychiatric condition and vice versa.

The Use of Rapid Tranquilization in Aggressive Behavior

BACKGROUND

Psychomotor agitation and aggressiveness in the context of mental illnessare medical emergencies. In a survey of six German psychiatric hospitals, 1.7 to 5 aggressive attacks per patient-year were reported. If talking to the patient has no calming effect, intervention with drugs is required. In this article, we review the evidence on tranquilizing drugs and discuss clinically relevant ethical and practical questions, e.g., with respect to involuntary medication.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent articles retrieved by a selective search in MEDLINE, supplemented by a reference search.

RESULTS

The evidence for the treatment of psychomotor agitation with antipsychotic drugs and benzodiazepines is relatively good. Randomized, controlled trials and a number of Cochrane reviews are available. These publications, however, contain data only on patients who were able to give informed consent. Their findings are often not applicable to real-life emergencies, e.g., when the patient is intoxicated with alcohol or suffers from a pre-existing disease. Haloperidol has a relatively weak effect on aggression when given alone and can also cause side effects such as early dyskinesia and epileptic seizures. It should, therefore, no longer be used as monotherapy. On the other hand, haloperidol combined with benzodiazepines or promethazine and monotherapy with lorazepam, olanzapine, ziprasidone, or aripiprazole intramuscular are effective options for the treatment of aggressive psychomotor agitation.

CONCLUSION

All of these drugs, if accepted by the patient, can also have an additional, beneficial placebo effect, with the patient calming down more rapidly than could be explained on pharmacological grounds alone. It is, therefore, important in emergencies (as at other times) for the patient to be involved in treatment decisions to the greatest possible extent.

Time from the Admission as the Predictor of Aggressive Behavior of Inpatients with Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder

The aim was to assess the incidence of aggressive events (AE) committed by patients diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorethder (SSD) after the first 7 days of hospitalization in psychiatric institution, in comparison to other psychiatric patients. This retrospective cohort study was performed at Psychiatric Hospital "Sveti Ivan", Zagreb, Croatia, using hospital safety records of all patients admitted between 2015 and 2017. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients who committed AE more than a week after the admission to the hospital. Secondary outcome was the time in days from admission to the first incident of AE. The primary analysis was performed using a multivariable binary logistic regression. SSD patients committed AE more often than other patients (incidence rate ratio 3.97 (95% CI 2.35-6.69; p < 0.001; FDR q = 0.002), but these occurred earlier in the course of hospitalization: median (IQR) 2 (1-10) days from admission compared to 11 (2-32) days in other patients. SSD patients had significantly and clinically relevantly lower odds for AE after the first week of hospitalization adjusted for the large number of pre-planned possible confounders (OR = 0.10; 95% CI 0.02-0.45; p = 0.003; FDR q = 0.002). SSD patients seem to express more aggression earlier in the course of hospitalization. Findings of this study indicate that hospitalization-inherent AE risk factors may play an important role in the etiology of AE and inpatients aggressive behavior. Their possible moderating effect should be included in risk-assessment instruments.

Organisational interventions for preventing and minimising aggression directed towards healthcare workers by patients and patient advocates

BACKGROUND

Workplace aggression is becoming increasingly prevalent in health care, with serious consequences for both individuals and organisations. Research and development of organisational interventions to prevent and minimise workplace aggression has also increased. However, it is not known if interventions prevent or reduce occupational violence directed towards healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of organisational interventions that aim to prevent and minimise workplace aggression directed towards healthcare workers by patients and patient advocates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases from inception to 25 May 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Wiley Online Library); MEDLINE (PubMed); CINAHL (EBSCO); Embase (embase.com); PsycINFO (ProQuest); NIOSHTIC (OSH-UPDATE); NIOSHTIC-2 (OSH-UPDATE); HSELINE (OSH-UPDATE); and CISDOC (OSH-UPDATE). We also searched the ClinicalTrials.gov (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portals (www.who.int/ictrp/en).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) of any organisational intervention to prevent and minimise verbal or physical aggression directed towards healthcare workers and their peers in their workplace by patients or their advocates. The primary outcome measure was episodes of aggression resulting in no harm, psychological, or physical harm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods for data collection and analysis. This included independent data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment by at least two review authors per included study. We used the Haddon Matrix to categorise interventions aimed at the victim, the vector or the environment of the aggression and whether the intervention was applied before, during or after the event of aggression. We used the random-effects model for the meta-analysis and GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies. Four studies were conducted in nursing home settings, two studies were conducted in psychiatric wards and one study was conducted in an emergency department. Interventions in two studies focused on prevention of aggression by the vector in the pre-event phase, being 398 nursing home residents and 597 psychiatric patients. The humour therapy in one study in a nursing home setting did not have clear evidence of a reduction of overall aggression (mean difference (MD) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.34; very low-quality evidence). A short-term risk assessment in the other study showed a decreased incidence of aggression (risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.78; very low-quality evidence) compared to practice as usual. Two studies compared interventions to minimise aggression by the vector in the event phase to practice as usual. In both studies the event was aggression during bathing of nursing home patients. In one study, involving 18 residents, music was played during the bathing period and in the other study, involving 69 residents, either a personalised shower or a towel bath was used. The studies provided low-quality evidence that the interventions may result in a medium-sized reduction of overall aggression (standardised mean difference (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.05; 2 studies), and physical aggression (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.46 to -0.24; 1 study; very low-quality evidence), but not in verbal aggression (SMD -0.31, 95% CI; -0.89 to 0.27; 1 study; very low-quality evidence). One intervention focused on the vector, the pre-event phase and the event phase. The study compared a two-year culture change programme in a nursing home to practice as usual and involved 101 residents. This study provided very low-quality evidence that the intervention may result in a medium-sized reduction of physical aggression (MD 0.51, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.91), but there was no clear evidence that it reduced verbal aggression (MD 0.76, 95% CI -0.02 to 1.54). Two studies evaluated a multicomponent intervention that focused on the vector (psychiatry patients and emergency department patients), the victim (nursing staff), and the environment during the pre-event and the event phase. The studies included 564 psychiatric staff and 209 emergency department staff. Both studies involved a comprehensive package of actions aimed at preventing violence, managing violence and environmental changes. There was no clear evidence that the psychiatry intervention may result in a reduction of overall aggression (odds ratio (OR) 0.85, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.15; low-quality evidence), compared to the control condition. The emergency department study did not result in a reduction of aggression (MD = 0) but provided insufficient data to test this.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found very low to low-quality evidence that interventions focused on the vector during the pre-event phase, the event phase or both, may result in a reduction of overall aggression, compared to practice as usual, and we found inconsistent low-quality evidence for multi-component interventions. None of the interventions included the post-event stage. To improve the evidence base, we need more RCT studies, that include the workers as participants and that collect information on the impact of violence on the worker in a range of healthcare settings, but especially in emergency care settings. Consensus on standardised outcomes is urgently needed.

Treatment Options for Acute Agitation in Psychiatric Patients: Theoretical and Empirical Evidence

Acute agitation is a common presenting symptom in the emergency ward and is also dealt with on a routine basis in psychiatry. Usually a symptom of an underlying mental illness, it is considered urgent and immediate treatment is indicated. The practice of treating agitation on an acute care basis is also referred to as rapid tranquilization. A variety of psychotropic drugs and combinations thereof can be used. The decision is usually made based on availability and the clinician's experience, with the typical antipsychotic haloperidol (alone or in combination with antihistaminergic and anticholinergic drugs such as promethazine), the benzodiazepines lorazepam, diazepam and midazolam as well as a variety of atypical antipsychotics being used for this purpose. Haloperidol is associated with extrapyramidal symptoms (which can be controlled by co-administration of promethazine) and may control agitation without inducing sedation, while benzodiazepines have a more pronounced sedating activity. The atypical antipsychotics aripiprazole and ziprasidone are better tolerated, while olanzapine is also a powerful sedative. Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of different treatment options have been conducted but they are extremely heterogenous and most have numerous methodological flaws, leading to a poor overall quality of evidence upon which guidelines for the appropriate treatment could be based. The combination of haloperidol and promethazine, which combines the sedative properties of the antihistamine with the more selective calming action of haloperidol (with a reduced risk of extrapyramidal effects compared to haloperidol alone because of the anticholinergic properties of promethazine) may be the best choice based on empirical evidence.

Perspective On Excellence in Forensic Mental Health Services: What We Can Learn From Oncology and Other Medical Services

We propose that excellence in forensic and other mental health services can be recognized by the abilities necessary to conduct randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and equivalent forms of rigorous quantitative research to continuously improve the outcomes of treatment as usual (TAU). Forensic mental health services (FMHSs) are growing, are high cost, and increasingly provide the main access route to more intensive, organized, and sustained pathways through care and treatment. A patient newly diagnosed with a cancer can expect to be enrolled in RCTs comparing innovations with the current best TAU. The same should be provided for patients newly diagnosed with severe mental illnesses and particularly those detained and at risk of prolonged periods in a secure hospital. We describe FMHSs in four levels 1 to 4, basic to excellent, according to seven domains: values or qualities, clinical organization, consistency, timescale, specialization, routine outcome measures, and research. Excellence is not elitism. Not all centers need to achieve excellence, though all should be of high quality. Services can provide each population with a network of centers with access to one center of excellence. Excellence is the standard needed to drive the virtuous circle of research and development that is necessary for teaching, training, and the pursuit of new knowledge and better outcomes. Substantial advances in treatment of severe mental disorders require a drive at a national and international level to create services that meet these standards of excellence and are focused, active, and productive to drive better functional outcomes for service users.

Acute interventions for aggression and agitation in psychosis: study protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Individuals with psychosis may access emergency services due to aggression and agitation. When the de-escalation technique fails to achieve tranquillisation, several pharmacological options are available. However, evidence on which intervention to prefer in terms of efficacy and tolerability to achieve resolution of the acute episode (ie, rapid tranquillisation) of aggression and agitation is currently fragmentary.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will include all randomised controlled trials comparing drugs or drug combinations or placebo for aggression or agitation episodes in adult individuals with psychosis. We will include individuals with psychosis (eg, schizophrenia and related disorders, bipolar disorder with psychotic symptoms, psychotic depression) but not substance or medication-induced psychosis or psychosis due to another medical condition. Our primary outcomes are the change in aggression or agitation scores within few hours since the administration of the intervention (efficacy outcome) and the proportion of participants who dropped out due to adverse effects (tolerability outcome). We will retrieve relevant studies from the register of studies of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group. Also, we will run additional searches on CENTRAL, Embase and PubMed to retrieve potentially eligible studies focusing on other psychiatric diagnoses than those in the schizophrenia spectrum. We will conduct a random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) for primary and secondary outcomes. In case of rare events of dichotomous outcomes, a common-effect Mantel-Haenszel NMA will be used instead. We will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks to rank all available treatments. Local and global methods of evaluation of inconsistency will be employed. Quality of evidence contributing to network estimates of the main outcomes will also be assessed with Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study does not require ethical approval. We will disseminate our findings by publishing results in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019137945.

Haloperidol discontinuation for people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a disabling serious mental illness that can be chronic. Haloperidol, one of the first generation of antipsychotic drugs, is effective in the treatment of schizophrenia but can have adverse side effects. The effects of stopping haloperidol in people with schizophrenia who are stable on their prescription are not well researched in the context of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of haloperidol discontinuation in people with schizophrenia who are stable on haloperidol.

SEARCH METHODS

On 20 February 2015, 24 May 2017, and 12 January 2019, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials including trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included clinical trials randomising adults with schizophrenia or related disorders who were receiving haloperidol, and were stable. We included trials that randomised such participants to either continue their current treatment with haloperidol or discontinue their haloperidol treatment. We included trials that met our selection criteria and reported usable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently checked all records retrieved from the search and obtained full reports of relevant records for closer inspection. We extracted data from included studies independently. All usable data were dichotomous, and we calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) using a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias within the included studies and used GRADE to create a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 232 participants comparing haloperidol discontinuation with haloperidol continuation. Discontinuation was achieved in all five studies by replacing haloperidol with placebo. The trials' size ranged between 23 and 87 participants. The methods of randomisation, allocation concealment and blinding were poorly reported.Participants allocated to discontinuing haloperidol treatment were more likely to show no improvement in global state compared with those in the haloperidol continuation group (n = 49; 1 RCT; RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.20; very low quality evidence: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited due to relevant methodological shortcomings of included trials). Those who continued haloperidol treatment were less likely to experience a relapse compared to people who discontinued taking haloperidol (n = 165; 4 RCTs; RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.74; very low quality evidence). Satisfaction with treatment (measured as numbers leaving the study early) was similar between groups (n = 43; 1 RCT; RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.28; very low quality evidence).No usable mental state, general functioning, general behaviour or adverse effect data were reported by any of the trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides limited evidence derived from small, short-term studies. The longest study was for one year, making it difficult to generalise the results to a life-long disorder. Very low quality evidence shows that discontinuation of haloperidol is associated with an increased risk of relapse and a reduction in the risk of 'global state improvement'. However, participant satisfaction with haloperidol treatment was not different from participant satisfaction with haloperidol discontinuation as measured by leaving the studies early. Due to the very low quality of these results, firm conclusions cannot be made. In addition, the available studies did not report usable data regarding the adverse effects of haloperidol treatment.Considering that haloperidol is one of the most widely used antipsychotic drugs, it was surprising that only a small number of studies into the benefit and harm of haloperidol discontinuation were available. Moreover, the available studies did not report on outcomes that are important to clinicians and to people with schizophrenia, particularly adverse effects and social outcomes. Better designed trials are warranted.

Animal Models of (or for) Aggression Reward, Addiction, and Relapse: Behavior and Circuits

Inappropriate and pathological aggression plays a leading role in the suffering and death of millions of people, and further places an untenable strain on the caregivers and families of those afflicted. In some cases, such as addictive drugs, aggression can be highly rewarding (appetitive) and continually pursued despite short- and long-term negative consequences. Similarly, recidivism (relapse) rates for repeat violent offenders are as high as relapse rates for drug addicts. Appetitive aggression and relapse to aggression seeking can be modeled in mice studies using conditioned place preference and self-administration procedures followed by a period of abstinence and subsequent tests for relapse to aggression preference and aggression seeking. These procedures allow for the study of the mechanisms that control the appetitive versus the consummatory (attack) phases of aggressive behavior. In this review, we first discuss the behavioral procedures developed to probe appetitive aggression in mouse models, spanning from Pavlovian to operant tasks, and we also describe the recently proposed phenomenon of "aggression addiction." Next, we discuss the pharmacological and circuit mechanisms of aggression conditioned place preference and aggression self-administration, seeking, and relapse, highlighting mechanistic congruence and divergence between appetitive and consummatory phases of aggression. We conclude by discussing clinical implications of the studies reviewed.

Nucleus Accumbens Drd1-Expressing Neurons Control Aggression Self-Administration and Aggression Seeking in Mice

We recently developed a mouse model of appetitive operant aggression and reported that adult male outbred CD-1 mice lever-press for the opportunity to attack subordinate male mice and relapse to aggression seeking during abstinence. Here we studied the role of nucleus accumbens (NAc) dopamine receptor (Drd)1- and Drd2-expressing neurons in aggression self-administration and aggression seeking. We trained CD-1 mice to self-administer intruders (9 d, 12 trials/d) and tested them for aggression self-administration and aggression seeking on abstinence Day 1. We used immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization to measure the neuronal activity marker Fos in the NAc, and cell-type-specific colocalization of Fos with Drd1- and Drd2-expressing neurons. To test the causal role of Drd1- and Drd2-expressing neurons, we validated a transgenic hybrid breeding strategy crossing inbred Drd1-Cre and Drd2-Cre transgenic mice with outbred CD-1 mice and used cell-type-specific Cre-DREADD (hM4Di) to inhibit NAc Drd1- and Drd2-expressing neuron activity. We found that aggression self-administration and aggression seeking induced higher Fos expression in NAc shell than in core, that Fos colocalized with Drd1 and Drd2 in both subregions, and that chemogenetic inhibition of Drd1-, but not Drd2-, expressing neurons decreased aggression self-administration and aggression seeking. Results indicate a cell-type-specific role of Drd1-expressing neurons that is critical for both aggression self-administration and aggression seeking. Our study also validates a simple breeding strategy between outbred CD-1 mice and inbred C57-based Cre lines that can be used to study cell-type and circuit mechanisms of aggression reward and relapse.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Aggression is often comorbid with neuropsychiatric diseases, including drug addiction. One form, appetitive aggression, exhibits symptomatology that mimics that of drug addiction and is hypothesized to be due to dysregulation of addiction-related reward circuits. However, our mechanistic understanding of the circuitry modulating appetitive operant aggression is limited. Here we used a novel mouse model of aggression self-administration and relapse, in combination with immunohistochemistry, in situ hybridization, and chemogenetic manipulations to examine how cell types in the nucleus accumbens are recruited for, and control, operant aggression self-administration and aggression seeking on abstinence Day 1. We found that one population, dopamine receptor 1-expressing neurons, act as a critical modulator of operant aggression reward and aggression seeking.

Managing acutely aggressive or agitated people in a psychiatric setting: a survey in Lebanon

Background: Violent patients constitute 10% of all psychiatric admissions. Treatment options and clinical practice interventions vary across the globe and no survey of practice in a Middle Eastern setting exists. Surveying treatments in Lebanon will show treatment interventions used in this part of the world and, most importantly, provide the treatment options that could potentially be used for clinical trials pertaining to emergency psychiatry. Methods: A survey of clinicians' opinions and practice was conducted between July and August 2017 at the largest psychiatric hospital in Lebanon. Results: Five of seven experienced psychiatrists provided opinions when interviewed of their preferred intervention when dealing with an emergency psychiatric episode. Whilst this varied in detail, there was a consistent view that there should first be verbal control, then use of medications, and finally physical restrain of the patient. A total of 39 emergency episodes (28 people) occurred in the one month (64% men in their 30s). Bipolar disorder was the most frequent single diagnosis behind the aggression (n=16, 41%; 12 people 43%) but the combined schizophrenia-like illnesses underlay 18 of the 39 episodes (46%; 13/28 people 46%). In clinical life, we found evidence of high family involvement, but little attempts made at initial verbal control in the hospital. All 39 episodes involved administration of pharmacological interventions. Medications were used in 29 of cases (74%) and non-medication interventions used in the remaining 10/39 (26%). Conclusion: This survey provides some evidence that clinicians' preferences may not fully reflect clinical practice but also that experienced clinicians are using several clearly effective techniques to manage these very difficult situations. However, as for other parts of the world, treatment in Lebanon has limited or no underpinning by evidence from well-designed, conducted and reported evaluative studies.

Functions of medial hypothalamic and mesolimbic dopamine circuitries in aggression

Aggression is a crucial survival behavior: it is employed to defend territory, compete for food and mating opportunities, protect kin, and resolve disputes. Although widely differing in its behavioral expression, aggression is observed across many species. The neural substrates of aggression have been investigated for nearly a century and two highly conserved circuitries emerge as critical substrates for generating and modulating aggression. One circuitry centers on the medial hypothalamus. Activity of the medial hypothalamic cells closely correlates with attacks and can bi-directionally modulate aggressive behaviors. The other aggression-related circuit involves the mesolimbic dopamine cells. Dopaminergic antagonists are the most commonly used treatment for suppressing human aggression in psychotic patients. Animal studies support essential roles of dopaminergic signaling in the nucleus accumbens in assessing the reward value of aggression and reinforcing the aggressive behaviors. In this review, we will provide an overview regarding the functions of medial hypothalamus and dopaminergic system in mediating aggressive behaviors and the potential interactions between these two circuitries.

Risperidone for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation)

BACKGROUND

Aggressive, agitated or violent behaviour due to psychosis constitutes an emergency psychiatric treatment where fast-acting interventions are required. Risperidone is a widely accessible antipsychotic that can be used to manage psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether oral risperidone alone is an effective treatment for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (up to April 2017); this register is compiled by systematic searches of major resources (including AMED, BIOSIS CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and registries of clinical trials) and their monthly updates, handsearches, grey literature, and conference proceedings. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rapid use of risperidone and other drugs, combinations of drugs or placebo for people exhibiting aggression or agitation (or both) thought to be due to psychosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected all citations from searches, identified relevant abstracts, and independently extracted data from all included studies. For binary data we calculated risk ratio (RR) and for continuous data we calculated mean difference (MD), all with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and used a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias for the included studies and used the GRADE approach to produce a 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

The review now contains data from nine trials (total n = 582) reporting on five comparisons. Due to risk of bias, small size of trials, indirectness of outcome measures and a paucity of investigated and reported 'pragmatic' outcomes, evidence was graded as very-low quality. None of the included studies provided useable data on our primary outcome 'tranquillisation or asleep' by 30 minutes, repeated need for tranquillisation or any economic outcomes. Data were available for our other main outcomes of agitation or aggression, needing restraint, and incidence of adverse effects.Risperidone versus haloperidol (up to 24 hours follow-up)For the outcome, specific behaviour - agitation, no clear difference was found between risperidone and haloperidol in terms of efficacy, measured as at least 50% reduction in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Psychotic Agitation Sub-score (PANSS-PAS) (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) and no effect was observed for need to use restraints (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 9.21; participants = 28; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence). Incidence of adverse effects was similar between treatment groups (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.66; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus olanzapineOne small trial (n = 29) reported useable data for the comparison risperidone versus olanzapine. No effect was observed for agitation measured as PANSS-PAS endpoint score at two hours (MD 2.50, 95% CI -2.46 to 7.46; very low-quality evidence); need to use restraints at four days (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.39 to 5.28; very-low quality evidence); specific movement disorders measured as Behavioural Activity Rating Scale (BARS) endpoint score at four days (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.83; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus quetiapineOne trial reported (n = 40) useable data for the comparison risperidone versus quetiapine. Aggression was measured using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) endpoint score at two weeks. A clear difference, favouring quetiapine was observed (MD 1.80, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.40; very-low quality evidence). No evidence of a difference between treatment groups could be observed for incidence of akathisia after 24 hours (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 6.06; very low-quality evidence). Two participants allocated to risperidone and one allocated to quetiapine experienced myocardial ischaemia during the trial.Risperidone versus risperidone + oxcarbazepineOne trial (n = 68) measured agitation using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Excited Component.(PANSS-EC) endpoint score and found a clear difference, favouring the combination treatment at one week (MD 2.70, 95% CI 0.42 to 4.98; very low-quality evidence), but no effect was observed for global state using Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) endpoint score at one week (MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.21; very-low quality evidence). Incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms after 24 hours was similar between treatment groups (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14; very-low quality evidence).Risperidone versus risperidone + valproic acidTwo trials compared risperidone with a combination of risperidone plus valproic acid. No clear differences between the treatment groups were observed for aggression (MOAS endpoint score at three days: MD 1.07, 95% CI -0.20 to 2.34; participants = 54; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) or incidence of akathisia after 24 hours: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.03; participants = 122; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, results for the main outcomes show no real effect for risperidone. The only data available for use in this review are from nine under-sampled trials and the evidence available is of very low quality. This casts uncertainty on the role of risperidone in rapid tranquillisation for people with psychosis-induced aggression. High-quality pragmatic RCTs are feasible and are needed before clear recommendations can be drawn on the use of risperidone for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

CaMKIIα expression in a mouse model of NMDAR hypofunction schizophrenia: Putative roles for IGF-1R and TLR4

Schizophrenia (SCZ) is a neuropsychiatric disorder that is linked to social behavioral deficits and other negative symptoms associated with hippocampal synaptic dysfunction. Synaptic mechanism of schizophrenia is characterized by loss of hippocampal N-Methyl-d-Aspartate Receptor (NMDAR) activity (NMDAR hypofunction) and dendritic spines. Previous studies show that genetic deletion of hippocampal synaptic regulatory calcium-calmodulin dependent kinase II alpha (CaMKIIα) cause synaptic and behavioral defects associated with schizophrenia in mice. Although CaMKIIα is involved in modulation of NMDAR activity, it is equally linked to inflammatory and neurotropin signaling in neurons. Based on these propositions, we speculate that non-neurotransmitter upstream receptors associated with neurotropic and inflammatory signaling activities of CaMKIIα may alter its synaptic function. Besides, how these receptors (i.e. inflammatory and neurotropic receptors) alter CaMKIIα function (phosphorylation) relative to hippocampal NMDAR activity in schizophrenia is poorly understood. Here, we examined the relationship between toll-like receptor (TLR4; inflammatory), insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 (IGF-1R; neurotropic) and CaMKIIα expression in the hippocampus of behaviorally deficient schizophrenic mice after we induced schizophrenia through NMDAR inhibition. Schizophrenia was induced in WT (C57BL/6) mice through intraperitoneal administration of 30mg/Kg ketamine (NMDAR antagonist) for 5days (WT/SCZ). Five days after the last ketamine treatment, wild type schizophrenic mice show deficiencies in sociability and social novelty behavior. Furthermore, there was a significant decrease in hippocampal CaMKIIα (p<0.001) and IGF-1R (p<0.001) expression when assessed through immunoblotting and confocal immunofluorescence microscopy. Additionally, WT schizophrenic mice show an increased percentage of phosphorylated CaMKIIα in addition to upregulated TLR4 signaling (TLR4, NF-κB, and MAPK/ErK) in the hippocampus. To ascertain the functional link between TLR4, IGF-1R and CaMKIIα relative to NMDAR hypofunction in schizophrenia, we created hippocampal-specific TLR4 knockdown mouse using AAV-driven Cre-lox technique (TLR4 KD). Subsequently, we inhibited NMDAR function in TLR4 KD mice in an attempt to induce schizophrenia (TLR4 KD SCZ). Interestingly, IGF-1R and CaMKIIα expressions were preserved in the TLR4 KD hippocampus after attenuation of NMDAR function. Furthermore, TLR4 KD SCZ mice showed no prominent defects in sociability and social novelty behavior when compared with the control (WT). Our results show that a sustained IGF-1R expression may preserve the synaptic activity of CaMKIIα while TLR4 signaling ablates hippocampal CaMKIIα expression in NMDAR hypofunction schizophrenia. Together, we infer that IGF-1R depletion and increased TLR4 signaling are non-neurotransmitter pro-schizophrenic cues that can reduce synaptic CaMKIIα activity in a pharmacologic mouse model of schizophrenia.

Aripiprazole (intramuscular) for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation)

BACKGROUND

People experiencing psychosis may become aggressive. Antipsychotics, such as aripiprazole in intramuscular form, can be used in such situations.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of intramuscular aripiprazole in the treatment of psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation).

SEARCH METHODS

On 11 December 2014 and 11 April 2017, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-based Register of Trials which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and registries of clinical trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that randomised people with psychosis-induced aggression or agitation to receive either intramuscular aripiprazole or another intramuscular intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations and, where possible, abstracts, ordered papers and re-inspected and quality assessed these. We included studies that met our selection criteria. At least two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies. We chose a fixed-effect model. We analysed dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and the 95% confidence intervals (CI). We analysed continuous data using mean differences (MD) and their CIs. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and used GRADE to create 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

Searching found 63 records referring to 21 possible trials. We could only include three studies, all completed over the last decade, with 885 participants, of which 707 were included for quantitative analyses in this systematic review. Due to limited comparisons, small size of trials and a paucity of investigated and reported 'pragmatic' outcomes, evidence was mostly graded as low or very low quality. No trials reported useful data for one of our primary outcomes of tranquil or asleep by 30 minutes. Economic outcomes were also not reported in the trials.When compared with placebo, fewer people in the aripiprazole group needed additional injections compared to the placebo group (2 RCTs, n = 382, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.85, very low-quality evidence). Clinically important improvement in agitation at two hours favoured the aripiprazole group (2 RCTs, n = 382, RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.92, very low-quality evidence). The numbers of non-responders after the first injection also favoured aripiprazole (1 RCT, n = 263, RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.71, low-quality evidence). Although no effect was found, more people in the aripiprazole compared to the placebo group experienced adverse effects (1 RCT, n = 117, RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.46, very low-quality evidence).Aripiprazole required more injections compared to haloperidol (2 RCTs, n = 477, RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.63, very low-quality evidence), with no significant difference in agitation (2 RCTs, n = 477, RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.11, very low-quality evidence), and similar non-responders after first injection (1 RCT, n = 360, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.79, low-quality evidence). Aripiprazole and haloperidol did not differ when taking into account the overall number of people that experienced at least one adverse effect (1 RCT, n = 113, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.35, very low-quality evidence).Compared to aripiprazole, olanzapine was better at reducing agitation (1 RCT, n = 80, RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.99, low-quality evidence) and had a more favourable effect on global state change scores (1 RCT, n = 80, MD 0.58, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.15, low-quality evidence), both at two hours. No differences were found in terms of experiencing at least one adverse effect during the 24 hours after treatment (1 RCT, n = 80, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.24, very low-quality evidence). However, participants allocated to aripiprazole experienced less somnolence (1 RCT, n = 80, RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.82, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence is of poor quality but there is some evidence aripiprazole is effective compared to placebo and haloperidol, but not when compared to olanzapine. However, considering that evidence comes from only three studies, caution is required in generalising these results to real-world practice. This review firmly highlights the need for more high-quality trials on intramuscular aripiprazole in the management of people with acute aggression or agitation.