Intramuscular aripiprazole for the treatment of acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison with intramuscular haloperidol

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.

Electron Transfer-Mediated Photodegradation of Phototoxic Antipsychotic Drug Quetiapine

Quetiapine (QTP) (1), a psychotropic agent belonging to a chemical class, dibenzothiazepine derivatives, is photosensitive and photolabile. Its photochemistry was studied in the presence of an electron donor N,N-dimethylaniline (DMA) and an electron acceptor 1,4-dicyanobenzene (DCB) under anaerobic conditions. This resulted in photoinduced electron transfer-mediated transformation of drug QTP. Irradiation of Quetiapine (QTP, 1) in the presence of electron donor N,N-dimethylaniline (DMA) under anaerobic conditions in a photochemical reactor afforded one major photoproduct 2 when irradiation of QTP (1) was carried out in the presence of electron acceptor 1,4-dicyanobenzene (DCB) under similar conditions; it afforded 3 as a major photoproduct. These photoproducts were isolated and characterized on the basis of their spectral (IR, UV, 1H NMR, 13C NMR, and mass spectra) studies. The photophysical properties of Quetiapine were also determined in several solvents to investigate the relevance of the molecular structure in their photophysics and consequently in their photochemistry.

Dosing antipsychotics in special populations of patients with schizophrenia: severe psychotic agitation, first psychotic episode and elderly patients

Antipsychotic (AP) dosing is well established in nonelderly patients with acute exacerbations of schizophrenia, but not in special populations.This review describes the AP dosing procedures that have been used in clinical studies for acute psychotic agitation, a first episode of psychosis (FEP), and elderly patients. AP dosing data was extracted from the databases of drug regulatory authorities, and from clinical studies available in the medical literature. In acute psychotic agitation, intramuscular and oral APs are frequently prescribed in higher doses than those that saturate D2 receptors. Supersaturating doses of APs should be avoided due to an increased risk of adverse effects. In FEP, many studies showed efficacy of low doses of APs. Studies with risperidone and haloperidol suggested a dose reduction of approximately one third. Titration with a lower starting dose is recommended in elderly patients, due to possible decreases in pharmacokinetic clearance, and due to the risk of concomitant diseases and drug interactions. Exposure to some APs has been associated with QTc prolongation and arrhythmias, and a small but significant increase in the risk of stroke and mortality with APs has been seen, particularly in older people with dementia-related psychosis.

Short-acting intramuscular second-generation antipsychotic drugs for acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psychomotor agitation is a common condition in patients with psychotic disorders. One treatment possibility is intramuscular (IM) second-generation antipsychotics. Yet their efficacy in this formulation and for this aim is unclear. This network meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy of short-acting IM second-generation antipsychotic drugs, haloperidol and placebo in patients with diagnosis of schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like disorders that present acute agitation.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, PubMed, BIOSIS, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP up to November 2018 and PubMed until March 2020. Study selection and outcome extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted to compare the different IM second-generation antipsychotics among themselves and with IM haloperidol and placebo. The primary outcome was the number of responders at 2 h after the first injection. Responders at 24 h were also analysed.

RESULTS

10 studies with 1964 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Ziprasidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole and haloperidol were more efficacious than placebo in calming patients at 2 h after administration. Furthermore, olanzapine was superior to aripiprazole. The results at 24 h confirmed the superiority of aripiprazole, olanzapine and haloperidol over placebo, while for ziprasidone no data were available.

CONCLUSIONS

All second-generation antipsychotics available as intramuscular medications were effective in reducing agitation in people with schizophrenia. Olanzapine was somewhat more efficacious than aripiprazole.

Safety and efficacy of pharmacologic agents used for rapid tranquilization of emergency department patients with acute agitation or excited delirium

Introduction: Management of patients with acute agitation or aggressive behavior can pose a significant challenge to health-care providers in emergency departments. Areas covered: This article provides a comprehensive review of the pharmacologic properties, efficacy, and safety profiles of select intramuscular (IM) sedative agents (i.e., antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, and ketamine) for rapid tranquilization. Expert opinion: Using antipsychotics and benzodiazepines - whether a single agent or combined - will have similar efficacy in producing sedation. But there are differences in the time to sedation depending on which agent is used. Based upon the available studies, droperidol (5-10 mg IM) and midazolam (5-10 mg IM) have the fastest onset of sedation when either is used as a single agent. When combination therapy is used, using midazolam with an antipsychotic agent, instead of lorazepam, may result in faster sedative effect. QT prolongation and torsades de pointes are uncommon adverse drug effects of antipsychotic administration. Ketamine is often reserved as a second-line agent when antipsychotics and benzodiazepines fail to produce the desired tranquilization. However, ketamine (5 mg/kg IM) is more frequently associated with airway compromise requiring endotracheal intubation. A low-dose of ketamine (2 mg/kg IM) may reduce the risk of airway compromise while providing adequate sedation.

Dopamine Receptor Partial Agonists: Do They Differ in Their Clinical Efficacy?

Dopamine receptor partial agonists (DRPAs; aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, and cariprazine) constitute a novel class of antipsychotics. Although they share a similar mechanism of action, DRPAs differ in their pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, drug interactions, or safety and tolerability. The antipsychotic efficacy of all three drugs was established in several placebo-controlled randomized trials (RCTs) in schizophrenia, both acute phase and relapse prevention. In addition, each of the DRPA agents has been tested in other psychiatric disorders, including bipolar disorder or major depression. However, a few studies have examined their comparative clinical efficacy. There are no head-to-head comparisons between aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, or cariprazine. In two acute schizophrenia RCTs of cariprazine and brexpiprazole, aripiprazole was used as an indirect comparator to control for study sensitivity. To assess potential differences in the efficacy of DRPAs, we reviewed data from controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Our results showed that the acute antipsychotic effects of DRPAs, as measured by the number needed to treat, are comparable. The three agents were superior to placebo in acute treatment, and cariprazine was found to be effective in the reduction of primary negative symptoms of schizophrenia. In the therapy of bipolar disorder, aripiprazole and cariprazine showed antimanic efficacy, cariprazine was also effective in the management of bipolar depression, and aripiprazole was effective for relapse prevention. The addon administration of aripiprazole or brexpiprazole reduced symptoms of major depression. Aripiprazole can control acute agitation associated with psychosis or bipolar disorder; brexpiprazole showed the potential to manage agitation in dementia patients. Aripiprazole has also established evidence of efficacy in children and adolescents and other conditions: OCD, tic disorders, and autism spectrum disorder. Our review of published data suggests that in terms of clinical efficacy, DRPAs are a heterogeneous group, with each drug possessing its own therapeutic benefits.

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 treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder: investigational drugs in early stages of their clinical development, and their clinical context and potential place in therapy

Introduction: Acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder may require pharmacologic management. Ideal medication characteristics for this indication include rapid onset, minimal side effects, and noninvasive administration techniques.Areas Covered: This review summarizes investigational agents in early clinical development for the management of acute agitation in patients with psychosis or mania; it also assesses where these agents may fit with current therapies to provide a clinical perspective. The authors conducted a broad search of clinicaltrials.gov to identify investigational agents for agitation or aggression in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Two medications met the search criteria: dexmedetomidine film (BXCL501) and intranasal olanzapine (INP105).Expert Opinion: Olanzapine is a well-known molecular entity in the psychiatric armamentarium but dexmedetomidine would be a new and unfamiliar agent for mental health providers. Nonetheless, although it is too early to make definitive statements about tolerability and efficacy, their unique administration mechanisms suggest that dexmedetomidine film and intranasal olanzapine may become valuable options for the rapid management of acute agitation in patients who are willing to cooperate with medication therapy.

Brazilian guidelines for the management of psychomotor agitation. Part 2. Pharmacological approach

Objective:

To present the essential guidelines for pharmacological management of patients with psychomotor agitation in Brazil.

Methods:

This is a systematic review of articles retrieved from the MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and SciELO databases published from 1997 to 2017. Other relevant articles in the literature were also used to develop these guidelines. The search strategy used structured questions formulated using the PICO model, as recommended by the Guidelines Project of the Brazilian Medical Association. Recommendations were summarized according to their level of evidence, which was determined using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine system and critical appraisal tools.

Results:

Of 5,362 articles retrieved, 1,731 abstracts were selected for further reading. The final sample included 74 articles that met all inclusion criteria. The evidence shows that pharmacologic treatment is indicated only after non-pharmacologic approaches have failed. The cause of the agitation, side effects of the medications, and contraindications must guide the medication choice. The oral route should be preferred for drug administration; IV administration must be avoided. All subjects must be monitored before and after medication administration.

Conclusion:

If non-pharmacological strategies fail, medications are needed to control agitation and violent behavior. Once medicated, the patient should be monitored until a tranquil state is possible without excessive sedation.

Systematic review registry number:

CRD42017054440.

The pharmacological management of agitated and aggressive behaviour: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction:

Non-pharmacological interventions preferably precede pharmacological interventions in acute agitation. Reviews of pharmacological interventions remain descriptive or compare only one compound with several other compounds. The goal of this study is to compute a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect on restoring calmness after a pharmacological intervention, so a more precise recommendation is possible.

Method:

A search in Pubmed and Embase was done to isolate RCT’s considering pharmacological interventions in acute agitation. The outcome is reaching calmness within maximum of 2 h, assessed by the psychometric scales of PANSS-EC, CGI or ACES. Also the percentages of adverse effects was assessed.

Results:

Fifty-three papers were included for a systematic review and meta-analysis. Most frequent studied drug is olanzapine. Changes on PANNS-EC and ACES at 2 h showed the strongest changes for haloperidol plus promethazine, risperidon, olanzapine, droperidol and aripiprazole. However, incomplete data showed that the effect of risperidon is overestimated. Adverse effects are most prominent for haloperidol and haloperidol plus lorazepam.

Conclusion:

Olanzapine, haloperidol plus promethazine or droperidol are most effective and safe for use as rapid tranquilisation. Midazolam sedates most quickly. But due to increased saturation problems, midazolam is restricted to use within an emergency department of a general hospital.

Management of Violence and Aggression in Emergency Environment; a Narrative Review of 200 Related Articles

CONTEXT

The aim of this study is to reviewing various approaches for dealing with agitated patients in emergency department (ED) including of chemical and physical restraint methods.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

This review was conducted by searching "Violence," "Aggression," and "workplace violence" keywords in these databases: PubMed, Scopus, EmBase, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar. In addition to using keywords for finding the papers, the related article capability was used to find more papers. From the found papers, published papers from 2005 to 2018 were chosen to enter the paper pool for further review.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 200 papers were used in this paper to conduct a comprehensive review regarding violence management in ED. The results were categorized as prevention, verbal methods, pharmacological interventions and physical restraint.

CONCLUSION

In this study various methods of chemical and physical restraint methods were reviewed so an emergency medicine physician be aware of various available choices in different clinical situations for agitated patients.

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.

Management of acute agitation in psychosis: an evidence-based approach in the USA

Agitation in psychiatric settings, particularly in psychosis, presents a staggering challenge for clinicians, who must both manage the patient's acute symptoms and simultaneously make an accurate diagnosis. Too often, the management of the former confounds the latter. Patients are very often sedated medically, which masks their underlying condition, rendering accurate diagnosis delayed and inherently difficult. Significant data are available regarding both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for agitation that maximise symptom control while minimising confounding side-effects. In this article, a review of the historical evolution of agitation management in psychotic illness is presented, followed by an evidence-based clinical guideline for managing agitation in psychosis in the USA.

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

BACKGROUND

Haloperidol used alone is recommended to help calm situations of aggression or agitation for people with psychosis. It is widely accessible and may be the only antipsychotic medication available in limited-resource areas.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether haloperidol alone is an effective treatment for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation, wherein clinicians are required to intervene to prevent harm to self and others.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (26th May 2016). 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, with no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people exhibiting aggression and/or agitation thought to be due to psychosis, allocated rapid use of haloperidol alone (by any route), compared with any other treatment. Outcomes of interest included tranquillisation or asleep by 30 minutes, repeated need for rapid tranquillisation within 24 hours, specific behaviours (threat or injury to others/self), adverse effects. We included trials meeting our selection criteria and providing useable data.

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), for continuous data we calculated mean difference (MD), and for cognitive outcomes we derived standardised mean difference (SMD) effect sizes, all with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and using a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias for the included studies and used the GRADE approach to produce 'Summary of findings' tables which included our pre-specified main outcomes of interest.

MAIN RESULTS

We found nine new RCTs from the 2016 update search, giving a total of 41 included studies and 24 comparisons. Few studies were undertaken in circumstances that reflect real-world practice, and, with notable exceptions, most were small and carried considerable risk of bias. Due to the large number of comparisons, we can only present a summary of main results.Compared with placebo, more people in the haloperidol group were asleep at two hours (2 RCTs, n=220, RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.82 to 0.95, very low-quality evidence) and experienced dystonia (2 RCTs, n=207, RR 7.49, 95%CI 0.93 to 60.21, very low-quality evidence).Compared with aripiprazole, people in the haloperidol group required fewer injections than those in the aripiprazole group (2 RCTs, n=473, RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.62 to 0.99, low-quality evidence). More people in the haloperidol group experienced dystonia (2 RCTs, n=477, RR 6.63, 95%CI 1.52 to 28.86, very low-quality evidence).Four trials (n=207) compared haloperidol with lorazepam with no significant differences with regard to number of participants asleep at one hour (1 RCT, n=60, RR 1.05, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.44, very low-quality of evidence) or those requiring additional injections (1 RCT, n=66, RR 1.14, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.43, very low-quality of evidence).Haloperidol's adverse effects were not offset by addition of lorazepam (e.g. dystonia 1 RCT, n=67, RR 8.25, 95%CI 0.46 to 147.45, very low-quality of evidence).Addition of promethazine was investigated in two trials (n=376). More people in the haloperidol group were not tranquil or asleep by 20 minutes (1 RCT, n=316, RR 1.60, 95%CI 1.18 to 2.16, moderate-quality evidence). Acute dystonia was too common in the haloperidol alone group for the trial to continue beyond the interim analysis (1 RCT, n=316, RR 19.48, 95%CI 1.14 to 331.92, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Additional data from new studies does not alter previous conclusions of this review. If no other alternative exists, sole use of intramuscular haloperidol could be life-saving. Where additional drugs are available, sole use of haloperidol for extreme emergency could be considered unethical. Addition of the sedating promethazine has support from better-grade evidence from within randomised trials. Use of an alternative antipsychotic drug is only partially supported by fragmented and poor-grade evidence. Adding a benzodiazepine to haloperidol does not have strong evidence of benefit and carries risk of additional harm.After six decades of use for emergency rapid tranquillisation, this is still an area in need of good independent trials relevant to real-world practice.

Rationale and design of the PLACID study: a randomised trial comparing the efficacy and safety of inhaled loxapine versus IM aripiprazole in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND

The management of acute agitation manifesting in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder requires swift pharmacological intervention to provide rapid symptomatic relief and prevent escalation to aggression and violence. Antipsychotic medications are widely used in this setting and the availability of an inhaled formulation with deep lung absorption of the antipsychotic loxapine has the potential to deliver a faster onset of therapeutic effect than the available intramuscular formulations of antipsychotics.

METHODS

The efficacy of inhaled loxapine and the alternative antipsychotic aripiprazole delivered via intramuscular (IM) injection will be compared in the Phase IIIb PLACID study. Adults (18-65 years) with a confirmed diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder presenting with acute agitation will be randomly assigned to open-label treatment in a 1:1 ratio. Clinical evaluation will be conducted by raters blinded to treatment assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint is time to response (defined as a Clinical Global Impression of Improvement [CGI-I] score of 1 [very much improved] or 2 [much improved]). Secondary endpoints will include the percentage of responders at different time points after dosing; the proportion of patients who receive 1 or 2 doses of study drug; time to second dose; time to rescue medication; satisfaction with study drug (evaluated using Item 14 of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication); and safety and tolerability. Approximately 360 patients will be recruited with an interim analysis conducted once 180 patients have completed the study to decide whether to stop for futility or continue with or without an increase in the sample size up to additional 288 patients.

DISCUSSION

The PLACID trial will assess the efficacy and safety of inhaled loxapine with deep lung absorption compared with the IM antipsychotic, aripiprazole, in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. In the event that the median time to response of inhaled loxapine is significantly shorter than that of the intramuscular aripiprazole, the PLACID study has the potential to support the inhaled antipsychotic therapy as the standard of care in this setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study protocol was registered with the European Clinical Trials Database on the 31 October 2014 (EudraCT number 2014-000456-29 ).

Brexpiprazole and cariprazine: distinguishing two new atypical antipsychotics from the original dopamine stabilizer aripiprazole

BACKGROUND

Brexpiprazole and cariprazine are the latest US Food and Drug Administration approved atypical antipsychotics available in the United States. Both function as partial agonists of the dopamine-2 receptor (D2R), a mechanism of action shared with aripiprazole. However, all three differ in their affinities for the D2R as well as for serotonin receptors (5-HTRs). This paper seeks to delineate these pharmacodynamic and clinical differences amongst the three dopamine partial agonist atypical antipsychotic drugs.

METHODS

PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov searches were used to generate preclinical and clinical evidence for review. Data derived from animal models and human subjects were used to provide insight on clinical mechanisms and adverse effect potentials. Clinical trial data were reviewed to compare clinical efficacy and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Efficacies among the three drugs are comparable for their shared indications. Side-effect profile and underlying pharmacodynamic mechanism of action for each drug may differ.

CONCLUSION

Partial agonism of the D2R is a similarity of the three drugs reviewed. Each drug varies in affinity for both the D2R and a diverse group of 5-HTRs, generating a distinct profile of clinical indications and adverse effects for each.

Efficacy of Atypical Antipsychotics in the Management of Acute Agitation and Aggression in Hospitalized Patients with Schizophrenia or Bipolar Disorder: Results from a Systematic Review

Acute agitation and aggression are common symptoms in patients with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. In this review, we discuss the prevalence, clinical assessment strategies, treatment options, and current Western and Chinese guidelines for the management of acute agitation and aggression in patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. Among available approaches, we discuss in detail recent evidence supporting the use of intramuscular (IM) antipsychotics and some recently approved oral atypical antipsychotics for the management of acute aggression and agitation in hospitalized patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia presenting with acute agitation or aggression, highlighting some differences between individual antipsychotic agents.

Intramuscular olanzapine versus intramuscular aripiprazole for the treatment of agitation in patients with schizophrenia: A pragmatic double-blind randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the effectiveness and adverse effects of intramuscular (IM) olanzapine and IM aripiprazole for the treatment of agitated patients with schizophrenia in clinical practice.

METHODS

A 24-hour randomized double-blind study carried out at a psychiatric hospital in Thailand enrolled adult patients (18-65years old) with schizophrenia experiencing agitation. Patients received one dose of IM olanzapine or IM aripiprazole followed by routine oral psychotropic medications. Efficacy was primarily measured using the Excited Component of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS-EC).

RESULTS

A total of 80 patients with a PANSS-EC score range of 22-35 entered the study, of whom 13% had a medical comorbidity and 40% a history of active substance abuse. The 40 patients receiving IM olanzapine showed greater improvement than the 40 patients receiving IM aripiprazole in PANSS-EC scores at 2h after the injection (p=0.002) but not at 24h. The two treatments were well tolerated. Patients receiving IM olanzapine experienced greater somnolence than those receiving IM aripiprazole. There were no clinically relevant changes in vital signs in either group.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that IM olanzapine and aripiprazole are similarly effective and well tolerated in the real-world treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia over the first 24h. However, in the early hours, IM olanzapine may produce more sedation and reductions in agitation.

Pharmacological treatment of acute agitation associated with psychotic and bipolar disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

We used systematic review methodology to identify and evaluate short-term pharmacological interventions for agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

METHOD

We searched electronic databases for randomised controlled trials involving comparisons between current treatments for agitation, benzodiazepines, antipsychotics and placebo. The patient population was adults with agitation associated with psychotic or bipolar disorder treated in specialist mental health services. The outcome of interest was change in agitation measured by accepted standard scales. Paired meta-analyses and network meta-analyses are presented.

RESULTS

Seventeen randomised controlled trials were identified (n = 3841). Treatments included haloperidol, olanzapine, aripiprazole, risperidone and lorazepam. The primary outcome was change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Excited Component scores. Pair-wise comparisons suggest that after 60 min, olanzapine is superior to haloperidol; no other treatment was more effective than any other. At 120 min, loxapine 10 mg is more effective than loxapine 5 mg, and olanzapine is more effective than lorazepam. In the network meta-analyses, no treatment was superior to any other.

CONCLUSION

Because of limitations of available research, firm conclusions could not be drawn regarding the efficacy and safety of any identified intervention. Based on our results, there is no evidence that one drug is more effective or preferred over any other and treatment decisions could be made based on individual patient needs or costs. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Assessment and management of agitation in psychiatry: Expert consensus

BACKGROUND

Psychomotor agitation is associated with different psychiatric conditions and represents an important issue in psychiatry. Current recommendations on agitation in psychiatry are not univocal. Actually, an improper assessment and management may result in unnecessary coercive or sedative treatments. A thorough and balanced review plus an expert consensus can guide assessment and treatment decisions.

METHODS

An expert task force iteratively developed consensus using the Delphi method. Initial survey items were based on systematic review of the literature. Subsequent surveys included new, re-worded or re-rated items.

RESULTS

Out of 2175 papers assessing psychomotor agitation, 124 were included in the review. Each component was assigned a level of evidence. Integrating the evidence and the experience of the task force members, a consensus was reached on 22 statements on this topic.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations on the assessment of agitation emphasise the importance of identifying any possible medical cause. For its management, experts agreed in considering verbal de-escalation and environmental modification techniques as first choice, considering physical restraint as a last resort strategy. Regarding pharmacological treatment, the "ideal" medication should calm without over-sedate. Generally, oral or inhaled formulations should be preferred over i.m. routes in mildly agitated patients. Intravenous treatments should be avoided.

The psychopharmacology of violence: making sensible decisions

Violent behavior associated with mental disorders is a common reason for admission to a psychiatric inpatient unit. Once hospitalized, patients may continue to be intermittently agitated and have persistent aggressive behaviors, preventing their discharge back into the community. Managing agitation quickly with effective pharmacological agents can avoid further escalation to aggression and violence. In the acute setting, this usually involves the parenteral use of antipsychotics, with or without benzodiazepines. Within the past decade, short-acting intramuscular formulations of second-generation antipsychotics have become available and provide a means to induce calm with a substantially lower risk of acute dystonia or akathisia compared with haloperidol. New alternative formulations that avoid injections include inhalation and sublingual administration. Longer-term management of persistent aggressive behavior by reducing the frequency and intensity of future episodes of agitation is more complex. In contrast to agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar mania, no agents have yet been approved by regulatory agencies for the treatment of persistent aggressive behavior. The strongest evidence supports the use of clozapine as an antihostility agent, followed by olanzapine. Adjunctive strategies with anticonvulsants and beta-adrenergic agents may also be worthwhile to consider.

The psychopharmacology algorithm project at the Harvard South Shore Program: an algorithm for acute mania

This new algorithm for the pharmacotherapy of acute mania was developed by the Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program. The authors conducted a literature search in PubMed and reviewed key studies, other algorithms and guidelines, and their references. Treatments were prioritized considering three main considerations: (1) effectiveness in treating the current episode, (2) preventing potential relapses to depression, and (3) minimizing side effects over the short and long term. The algorithm presupposes that clinicians have made an accurate diagnosis, decided how to manage contributing medical causes (including substance misuse), discontinued antidepressants, and considered the patient's childbearing potential. We propose different algorithms for mixed and nonmixed mania. Patients with mixed mania may be treated first with a second-generation antipsychotic, of which the first choice is quetiapine because of its greater efficacy for depressive symptoms and episodes in bipolar disorder. Valproate and then either lithium or carbamazepine may be added. For nonmixed mania, lithium is the first-line recommendation. A second-generation antipsychotic can be added. Again, quetiapine is favored, but if quetiapine is unacceptable, risperidone is the next choice. Olanzapine is not considered a first-line treatment due to its long-term side effects, but it could be second-line. If the patient, whether mixed or nonmixed, is still refractory to the above medications, then depending on what has already been tried, consider carbamazepine, haloperidol, olanzapine, risperidone, and valproate first tier; aripiprazole, asenapine, and ziprasidone second tier; and clozapine third tier (because of its weaker evidence base and greater side effects). Electroconvulsive therapy may be considered at any point in the algorithm if the patient has a history of positive response or is intolerant of medications.

[Efficacy of aripiprazole for the treatment of schizophrenia: what dose is required?]

OBJECTIVE

Problem of the choice of antipsychotic dose is a key issue in clinical practice. It determines the efficacy and safety of treatment. Aripiprazole is recommended at a dose of between 10 and 15 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia, with a dose range considered to be effective, between 10 and 30 mg/day. This wide therapeutic range prompted us to investigate the existence of a possible dose-effect relationship for aripiprazole in the treatment of schizophrenia.

METHOD

We conducted a literature review from PubMed and EMBASE database, with the keywords: aripiprazole, schizophrenia. We limited it to studies published in English and French, with the main objective to assess the efficacy of aripiprazole in patients with schizophrenia. We selected only randomized clinical trials, double-blind, controlled against placebo or against an active comparator. Studies in which aripiprazole was studied added to another antipsychotic were not retained.

RESULTS

Twenty-two randomized, double-blind, controlled studies were selected. Three studies assessed the efficacy of aripiprazole on agitation symptoms in patients with schizophrenia and for which a dose of aripiprazole between 1 and 15mg showed significant efficacy compared to placebo. Seven clinical trials focused on the effect of aripiprazole short term (less than 12weeks). For the primary endpoint (PANSS scores), aripiprazole was superior to placebo or equivalent to active comparators (risperidone, olanzapine or haloperidol). These short-term studies revealed a range of effective doses from 10 mg/day to 20 mg/day. Five studies, lasting between 16 and 52 weeks, with a primary endpoint being the time to discontinuation for any cause for two studies, the time before relapse in one study, and the improvement in PANSS scores for the two other studies. On these different endpoints, aripiprazole was effective at average doses between 15 and 28.1 mg/day. The safety of aripiprazole was particularly favourable in these trials. Finally, we listed seven post-hoc analyses. In support of these long-term analyses on different endpoints, aripiprazole showed significant efficacy at higher doses (20 and 30 mg/day) than those used in the agitation treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

No study was designed to compare aripiprazole doses in schizophrenia. Nevertheless, efficacy on agitation and hostility components had been observed for doses of 10mg/day, or lower; whereas the antipsychotic effect in acute or maintenance phase appeared optimal for doses ranging from 10 to 25 mg/day. Only one study retained a minimum effective dose of 10mg/day on the PANSS scores. This literature review reveals an effective dose range between 10 and 25 mg/day for aripiprazole in schizophrenia. Less than 10 mg/day did not show significant efficacy on symptoms of schizophrenia, apart from a specific short-term effect on agitation, at very low doses (starting at 1mg). Optimization of treatment, at doses above 25 mg/day, cannot be the subject of evidence-based recommendations.

The comparative efficacy of intramuscular antipsychotics for the management of acute agitation

OBJECTIVE

To review the current role and comparative efficacy of short-acting intramuscular (IM) antipsychotics in the management of acute agitation, in current clinical practice.

METHOD

The efficacy and tolerability of IM antipsychotics in the management of acute agitation in current clinical practice were reviewed in the Medline, PubMed, Cinahl Plus, Scopus-v.4 and PsycInfo databases.

RESULTS

The comparative efficacy of the rapidly-acting IM atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, ziprasidone and aripiprazole) is similar to that of the typical antipsychotic, haloperidol. IM olanzapine and ziprasidone were associated with fewer extrapyramidal side-effects and had similar cardiac tolerability to IM haloperidol.

CONCLUSIONS

Further studies are required in the ongoing development of contemporary, evidence-based clinical guidelines in acute agitation, including head-to-head comparisons of currently utilized IM atypical antipsychotics, sequential treatment or combinations of medications.

Haloperidol versus placebo for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Haloperidol was developed in the late 1950s for use in the field of anaesthesia. Research subsequently demonstrated effects on hallucinations, delusions, aggressiveness, impulsiveness and states of excitement and led to the introduction of haloperidol as an antipsychotic.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical effects of haloperidol for the management of schizophrenia and other similar serious mental illnesses compared with placebo.

SEARCH METHODS

Initially, we electronically searched the databases of Biological Abstracts (1985-1998), CINAHL (1982-1998), The Cochrane Library (1998, Issue 4), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (December 1998), EMBASE (1980-1998), MEDLINE (1966-1998), PsycLIT (1974-1998), and SCISEARCH. We also checked references of all identified studies for further trial citations and contacted the authors of trials and pharmaceutical companies for further information and archive material.For the 2012 update, on 15 May 2012, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all relevant randomised controlled trials comparing the use of haloperidol (any oral dose) with placebo for those with schizophrenia or other similar serious, non-affective psychotic illnesses (however diagnosed). Our main outcomes of interest were death, loss to follow-up, clinical and social response, relapse and severity of adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We evaluated data independently and extracted, re-inspected and quality assessed the data. We analysed dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and calculated their 95% confidence intervals (CI). For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD). We excluded continuous data if loss to follow-up was greater than 50% and inspected data for heterogeneity. We used a fixed-effect model for all analyses. For the 2012 update, we assessed risk of bias of included studies and used the GRADE approach to create a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five trials randomising 4651 people are now included in this review. We chose seven main outcomes of interest for the 'Summary of findings' table. More people allocated haloperidol improved in the first six weeks of treatment than those given placebo (4 RCTs n = 472, RR 0.67 CI 0.56 to 0.80, moderate quality evidence). A further eight trials also found a difference favouring haloperidol across the six weeks to six months period (8 RCTs n = 307 RR 0.67 CI 0.58 to 0.78, moderate quality evidence). Relapse data from two trials favoured haloperidol at < 52 weeks but the evidence was very low quality (2 RCTs n = 70, RR 0.69 CI 0.55 to 0.86). Moderate quality evidence showed about half of those entering studies failed to complete the short trials (six weeks to six months), although, at up to six weeks, 16 studies found a difference that marginally favoured haloperidol (n = 1812, RR 0.87 CI 0.80 to 0.95). Adverse effect data does, nevertheless, support clinical impression that haloperidol is a potent cause of movement disorders, at least in the short term. Moderate quality evidence indicates that haloperidol caused parkinsonism (5 RCTs n = 485, RR 5.48 CI 2.68 to 11.22), akathisia (6 RCTs n = 695, RR 3.66 CI 2.24 to 5.97, and acute dystonia (5 RCTs n = 471, RR 11.49 CI 3.23 to 10.85). Discharge from hospital was equivocal between groups (1 RCT n = 33, RR 0.85 CI 0.47 to 1.52, very low quality evidence). Data were not reported for death and patient satisfaction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Haloperidol is a potent antipsychotic drug but has a high propensity to cause adverse effects. Where there is no treatment option, use of haloperidol to counter the damaging and potentially dangerous consequences of untreated schizophrenia is justified. However, where a choice of drug is available, people with schizophrenia and clinicians may wish to prescribe an alternative antipsychotic with less likelihood of adverse effects such as parkinsonism, akathisia and acute dystonias. Haloperidol should be less favoured as a control drug for randomised trials of new antipsychotics.

Are low doses of antipsychotics effective in the management of psychomotor agitation? A randomized, rated-blind trial of 4 intramuscular interventions

BACKGROUND

Psychomotor agitation can be associated with a wide range of medical conditions. Although clinical practice advocates the use of several drugs for the management of psychomotor agitation, there are still very few controlled studies comparing the profiles of action and the adverse effects of different drugs that induce tranquilization.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 4 low-dose pharmacological interventions used to control psychomotor agitation guided by the clinical response.

METHODS

Using a randomized, rated-blind design, 100 agitated patients were assigned to receive 1 of 4 treatments: haloperidol (2.5 mg) + promethazine (25 mg) (HLP + PMZ), haloperidol (2.5 mg) + midazolam (7.5 mg) (HLP + MID), ziprasidone (10 mg) (ZIP), or olanzapine (10 mg) (OLP). Patients were evaluated just before the intervention and after 30, 60, and 90 minutes, using the Agitation-Calmness Evaluating Scale. Adverse effects were assessed within 24 hours after the intervention, using selected items from the UKU Scale (Ugvalg Klinisk Undersgelser Side Effect Scale). According to the clinical indication, medication could be repeated twice after the first injection. Data were analyzed using general linear model with repeated measures and logistic regression.

RESULTS

All treatment options promoted a reduction in agitation, without causing excessive sedation, although a lower reduction in agitation was observed with HLP + PMZ and ZIP compared with HLP + MID and OLZ. The need for an additional dose of medication was observed in 22 patients, and only 8 remained agitated during the entire 90-minute period. A higher risk for the development of extrapyramidal symptoms within the following 24 hours was observed with HLP + PMZ.

DISCUSSION

Low doses of haloperidol combined with midazolam can be as effective as olanzapine in reducing psychomotor agitation without increasing the risk of extrapyramidal effects. Because of the higher risk for the occurrence of extrapyramidal symptoms, the combination of haloperidol with promethazine should be considered a second-line treatment option.

Consensus statement on the use of intramuscular aripiprazole for the rapid control of agitation in bipolar mania and schizophrenia

As much as the ideal treatment goal for severe mental illnesses such as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia is to prevent or delay the recurrence or relapse of acute episodes, when the patient presents with an acute episode, the goal should be to manage behavioural symptoms, and return to prior levels of symptomatic control. In a serious mental illness, the management of the acutely agitated state may require rapid tranquillisation (RT) to control violent and/or disturbed behaviour when all other methods of de-escalation have failed. Current clinical practice guidelines for emergency interventions in the case of acutely disturbed behaviours favour calming the patient by reducing agitation with mild sedation, but not sleep, to allow continued interaction with the patient, to ensure an accurate diagnosis, and to enable patients to be actively engaged in treatment decisions. Pharmacotherapy is an essential element in RT and the available agents used may be unique and separate from the patient's regular course of treatment, primarily because agents used in RT may not be suitable for long-term treatment due to an unfavourable efficacy and safety profile. Therefore, the choice of pharmacotherapy is essential to achieve an effective RT and a smooth transition to standard care and routine daily life for the patient. Of the available agents for RT, aripiprazole demonstrated a favourable efficacy and safety profile both over the short-term - including in its intramuscular form (IM) - and in the long-term treatment of bipolar I disorder and schizophrenia. The objective of this article is to assess the available clinical data on IM aripiprazole as a treatment option for the rapid control of agitation and disturbed behaviours in these conditions and to provide a consensus statement based on the expertise of UK healthcare practitioners in acute treatment units.

The psychopharmacology algorithm project at the Harvard South Shore Program: an update on schizophrenia

This article is an update of the algorithm for schizophrenia from the Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program. A literature review was conducted focusing on new data since the last published version (1999-2001). The first-line treatment recommendation for new-onset schizophrenia is with amisulpride, aripiprazole, risperidone, or ziprasidone for four to six weeks. In some settings the trial could be shorter, considering that evidence of clear improvement with antipsychotics usually occurs within the first two weeks. If the trial of the first antipsychotic cannot be completed due to intolerance, try another until one of the four is tolerated and given an adequate trial. There should be evidence of bioavailability. If the response to this adequate trial is unsatisfactory, try a second monotherapy. If the response to this second adequate trial is also unsatisfactory, and if at least one of the first two trials was with risperidone, olanzapine, or a first-generation (typical) antipsychotic, then clozapine is recommended for the third trial. If neither trial was with any these three options, a third trial prior to clozapine should occur, using one of those three. If the response to monotherapy with clozapine (with dose adjusted by using plasma levels) is unsatisfactory, consider adding risperidone, lamotrigine, or ECT. Beyond that point, there is little solid evidence to support further psychopharmacological treatment choices, though we do review possible options.

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

BACKGROUND

Haloperidol, used alone is recommended to help calm situations of aggression with people with psychosis. This drug is widely accessible and may be the only antipsychotic medication available in areas where resources are limited.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether haloperidol alone, administered orally, intramuscularly or intravenously, is effective treatment for psychosis-induced agitation or aggression.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (1st June 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled  trials (RCTs) involving people exhibiting agitation or aggression (or both) thought to be due to psychosis, allocated rapid use of haloperidol alone (by any route), compared with any other treatment. Outcomes included tranquillisation or asleep by 30 minutes, repeated need for rapid tranquillisation within 24 hours, specific behaviours (threat or injury to others/self), adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected and assessed studies for methodological quality and extracted data. 'Summary of findings' tables were produced for each comparison grading the evidence and calculating, where possible and appropriate, a range of absolute effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 studies comparing haloperidol with 18 other treatments. Few studies were undertaken in circumstances that reflect real world practice, and, with notable exceptions, most were small and carried considerable risk of bias.Compared with placebo, more people in the haloperidol group were asleep at two hours (2 RCTs, n = 220, risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.95). Dystonia was common (2 RCTs, n = 207, RR 7.49, CI 0.93 to 60.21). Compared with aripiprazole, people in the haloperidol group required fewer injections than those in the aripiprazole group (2 RCTs, n = 473, RR 0.78, CI 0.62 to 0.99). More people in the haloperidol group experienced dystonia (2 RCTs, n = 477, RR 6.63, CI 1.52 to 28.86).Despite three larger trials with ziprasidone (total n = 739), data remain patchy, largely because of poor design and reporting. Compared with zuclopenthixol acetate, more people who received haloperidol required more than three injections (1 RCT, n = 70, RR 2.54, CI 1.19 to 5.46).Three trials (n = 205) compared haloperidol with lorazepam. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to the number of participants asleep at one hour (1 RCT, n = 60, RR 1.05, CI 0.76 to 1.44). However, by three hours, significantly more people were asleep in the lorazepam group compared with the haloperidol group (1 RCT, n = 66, RR 1.93, CI 1.14 to 3.27). There were no differences in numbers requiring more than one injection (1 RCT, n = 66, RR 1.14, CI 0.91 to 1.43).Haloperidol's adverse effects were not offset by addition of lorazepam (e.g. dystonia 1 RCT, n = 67, RR 8.25, CI 0.46 to 147.45; required antiparkinson medication RR 2.74, CI 0.81 to 9.25). Addition of promethazine was investigated in one larger and better graded trial (n = 316). More people in the haloperidol group were not tranquil or asleep by 20 minutes (RR 1.60, CI 1.18 to 2.16). Significantly more people in the haloperidol alone group experienced one or more adverse effects (RR 11.28, CI 1.47 to 86.35). Acute dystonia for those allocated haloperidol alone was too common for the trial to continue beyond the interim analysis (RR 19.48, CI 1.14 to 331.92).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

If no other alternative exists, sole use of intramuscular haloperidol could be life-saving. Where additional drugs to offset the adverse effects are available, sole use of haloperidol for the extreme emergency, in situations of coercion, could be considered unethical. Addition of the sedating promethazine has support from better-grade evidence from within randomised trials. Use of an alternative antipsychotic drug is only partially supported by fragmented and poor-grade evidence. Evidence for use of newer generation antipsychotic alternatives is no stronger than that for older drugs. Adding a benzodiazepine to haloperidol does not have strong evidence of benefit and carries a risk of additional harm.After six decades of use for emergency rapid tranquillisation, this is still an area in need of good independent trials relevant to real world practice.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Schizophrenia, part 1: update 2012 on the acute treatment of schizophrenia and the management of treatment resistance

These updated guidelines are based on a first edition of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Schizophrenia published in 2005. For this 2012 revision, all available publications pertaining to the biological treatment of schizophrenia were reviewed systematically to allow for an evidence-based update. These guidelines provide evidence-based practice recommendations that are clinically and scientifically meaningful and these guidelines are intended to be used by all physicians diagnosing and treating people suffering from schizophrenia. Based on the first version of these guidelines, a systematic review of the MEDLINE/PUBMED database and the Cochrane Library, in addition to data extraction from national treatment guidelines, has been performed for this update. The identified literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy and then categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F; Bandelow et al. 2008b, World J Biol Psychiatry 9:242). This first part of the updated guidelines covers the general descriptions of antipsychotics and their side effects, the biological treatment of acute schizophrenia and the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

Pharmacological management of acute and persistent aggression in forensic psychiatry settings

Aggressive behaviour is common in forensic psychiatric settings. The aetiology of aggressive behaviour is multifactorial and can be driven by psychosis, impulsivity, psychopathy, intoxication, cognitive impairment, or a combination of all of these. Recognition of the different factors behind the aggression can inform medication selection and the relative need for specific environmental and behavioural interventions in a forensic psychiatric setting. Acute agitation needs to be managed quickly and effectively before further escalation of the behavioural dyscontrol occurs. Benzodiazepines and/or antipsychotic medications are often used and can be given intramuscularly to achieve a rapid onset of action. Available are intramuscular preparations of second-generation antipsychotics that have similar efficacy to lorazepam and haloperidol in reducing agitation, but are well tolerated and not associated with the extrapyramidal adverse effects, including akathisia, that can plague the older first-generation antipsychotics. The longer-term management of persistent aggressive behaviour can be quite complex. A major obstacle is that the causality of aggressive events can differ from patient to patient, and also from event to event in the same patient. For patients with schizophrenia and persistent aggressive behaviour, clozapine is recommended both for its superior antipsychotic effect and its specific anti-hostility effect. Mood stabilizers such as valproate may be helpful in instances of poor impulsivity and personality disorders. Other agents that have been successfully used include β-adrenoceptor antagonists (β-blockers) and antidepressants.

[Psychomotor agitation, pharmaceutical sedation and psychiatric emergency in psychotic patients]

Psychomotor agitation, very common among psychiatric emergencies, raises the question of pharmaceutical sedation, its indications, and its issues, notably with regard to the observance in postemergency. A new approach to sedation places it within its therapeutic aim and also takes into account the sometimes harmful impact on the course of the patient's care. A pretherapeutical, analysis both clinical and environmental is crucial. The time spent on the initial meeting and assessment is essential. The evolution of professional practices in mental health allows us to distinguish three kinds of sedation (vigilance, behaviour and psychical) that guide the choice and the mode of psychotropic drug use. The harmful effects of an ever-increasing use of sedation is debated. The use of atypical antipsychotics and injectable forms is argued. Early psychical sedation is preferable to the obsolete practice of vigilance sedation and to behavioural sedation with its limited indications. The use of excessive or prolonged sedation might have a detrimental effect on the care offered after psychiatric emergency treatment.

Aripiprazole versus placebo for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

First generation 'typical' antipsychotics such as chlorpromazine and haloperidol have been the mainstay of treatment up until the introduction of the second generation 'atypical' antipsychotics such as risperidone and olanzapine. Typical and atypical antipsychotics do provide a treatment response for most people with schizophrenia, whether a reduction in psychotic episodes or a lessening in the severity of their illness. However, a proportion of people still do not respond adequately to antipsychotic medication. Additionally, atypical and especially typical antipsychotics are associated with serious adverse effects, which can often compromise compliance with medication and therefore increase the incidences of relapse. In this review we examine the effects of aripiprazole compared with placebo.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of aripiprazole compared with placebo for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (January 2008) which is based on regular searches of BIOSIS, CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. For this update, we carried out an initial search in May 2007 and a second search in August 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials comparing aripiprazole with placebo in people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a fixed-effect model. We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where appropriate. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD) again based on a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Despite the fact that 2585 people participated in nine randomised aripiprazole studies, we were unable to extract any usable data on death, service outcomes, general functioning, behaviour, engagement with services, satisfaction with treatment; economic outcomes or cognitive functioning. In general, study attrition was very large for all studies over four weeks' duration. There was high attrition in most of the included studies. Fewer people left the aripiprazole group compared with those in the placebo group (n = 2585, 9 RCTs, RR 0.73 CI 0.60 to 0.87). Compared with placebo, aripiprazole significantly decreased relapse in both the short (n = 310, 1 RCT, RR 0.59 CI 0.45 to 0.77) and medium term (n = 310, 1 RCT, RR 0.66 CI 0.53 to 0.81). It also produced better compliance with study protocol (n = 2275, 8 RCTs, RR 0.74 CI 0.59 to 0.93). Aripiprazole may decrease prolactin levels below those expected from placebo (n = 305, 2 RCT, RR 0.21 CI 0.11 to 0.37). Insomnia (˜23%) and headaches (˜15%) were commonly reported in both groups, with no significant difference.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Aripiprazole may be effective for the treatment of schizophrenia. Aripiprazole has a lower risk of raised prolactin and prolongation of the QTc interval. Clearly reported pragmatic short-, medium- and long-term randomised controlled trials should be undertaken to determine its position in everyday clinical practice.

Rapid tranquilization for agitated patients in emergency psychiatric rooms: a randomized trial of olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine, haloperidol plus midazolam and haloperidol alone

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of intramuscular olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine, haloperidol plus midazolam and haloperidol alone as the first medication(s) used to treat patients with agitation and aggressive behavior. METHOD: One hundred fifty patients with agitation caused by psychotic or bipolar disorder were randomly assigned under double-blind conditions to receive olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus midazolam, haloperidol plus promethazine or haloperidol alone. The Overt Agitation Severity Scale, Overt Aggression Scale and Ramsay Sedation Scale were applied within 12 hours after the first dosage. RESULTS: All medications produced a calming effect within one hour of administration, but only olanzapine and haloperidol reduced agitation by less than 10 points, and only olanzapine reduced aggression by less than four points in the first hour. After twelve hours, only patients treated with haloperidol plus midazolam had high levels of agitation and aggression and also more side effects. Ziprasidone, olanzapine and haloperidol alone had more stable results for agitation control, while ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine and olanzapine had stable results for aggression control. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine, haloperidol plus midazolam and haloperidol were effective in controlling agitation and aggression caused by mental illness over 12 hours. Although all the drugs had advantages and disadvantages, haloperidol plus midazolam was associated with the worst results in all the observed parameters.

Antipsychotic treatments for the elderly: efficacy and safety of aripiprazole

Delusions, hallucinations and other psychotic symptoms can accompany a number of conditions in late life. As such, elderly patients are commonly prescribed antipsychotic medications for the treatment of psychosis in both acute and chronic conditions. Those conditions include schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and dementia. Elderly patients are at an increased risk of adverse events from antipsychotic medications because of age-related pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic changes as well as polypharmacy. Drug selection should be individualized to the patient's previous history of antipsychotic use, current medical conditions, potential drug interactions, and potential side effects of the antipsychotic. Specifically, metabolic side effects should be closely monitored in this population. This paper provides a review of aripiprazole, a newer second generation antipsychotic agent, for its use in a variety of psychiatric disorders in the elderly including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, dementia, Parkinson's disease and depression. We will review the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of aripiprazole as well as dosing, diagnostic indications, efficacy studies, and tolerability including its metabolic profile. We will also detail patient focused perspectives including quality of life, patient satisfaction and adherence.

A review of the safety and tolerability of aripiprazole

It seems that the efficacy of aripiprazole for treating schizophrenia is mediated through a combination of partial agonism at dopamine D2 and serotonin 5-HT1A receptors and antagonism at serotonin 5-HT2A receptors. Aripiprazole has also received approval for the treatment of bipolar disorder as adjunctive therapy or monotherapy (manic or mixed episodes) as well as an augmentation therapy of major depressive disorder (MDD) by the US FDA. The overall safety and tolerability of aripiprazole is favorable compared to other atypical antipsychotics across the approved indications. Aripiprazole showed a minimal propensity for clinically significant weight gain and metabolic disruption. However, extrapyramidal side effects, such as akathisia, are reported and may limit its clinical use in some cases, particularly in patients with bipolar disorder and MDD. This review focuses on the tolerability and safety of aripiprazole across a broad spectrum of psychiatric disorders while taking into consideration results from registrational studies as well as findings from studies in the naturalistic setting. In conclusion, whereas the comparative safety and tolerability of aripiprazole has not been systematically evaluated in comparator studies, tolerability and safety issues commonly associated with atypical antipsychotics such as weight gain and metabolic syndrome are less prominent with aripiprazole.

The 2009 schizophrenia PORT psychopharmacological treatment recommendations and summary statements

In light of the large number of studies published since the 2004 update of Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team psychopharmacological treatment recommendations, we conducted an extensive literature review to determine whether the current psychopharmacological treatment recommendations required revision and whether there was sufficient evidence to warrant new treatment recommendations for prespecified outcomes of interest. We reviewed over 400 articles, which resulted in 16 treatment recommendations: the revision of 11 previous treatment recommendations and 5 new treatment recommendations. Three previous treatment recommendations were eliminated. There were 13 interventions and/or outcomes for which there was insufficient evidence for a treatment recommendation, and a statement was written to summarize the current level of evidence and identify important gaps in our knowledge that need to be addressed. In general, there was considerable consensus among the Psychopharmacology Evidence Review Group and the expert consultants. Two major areas of contention concerned whether there was sufficient evidence to recommend specific dosage ranges for the acute and maintenance treatment of first-episode and multi-episode schizophrenia and to endorse the practice of switching antipsychotics for the treatment of antipsychotic-related weight gain. Finally, there continue to be major gaps in our knowledge, including limited information on (1) the use of adjunctive pharmacological agents for the treatment of persistent positive symptoms or other symptom domains of psychopathology, including anxiety, cognitive impairments, depressive symptoms, and persistent negative symptoms and (2) the treatment of co-occurring substance or medical disorders that occur frequently in individuals with schizophrenia.

Schizophrenia with impulsive and aggressive behaviors

Impulsive and aggressive behaviors are important clinical challenges in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. They occur both in the acute phase as well as in the chronic phase of the disorder and call for differentiated treatment interventions. It is important to always first consider behavioral and nonpharmacological interventions. High levels of structure and organization together with a nonconfrontational approach may be very successful interventions. In terms of acute pharmacological interventions, clinicians now have a broad spectrum of intramuscular antipsychotic compounds available with rapid onset of action and relatively little sedation. There is a need for new compounds with a more acceptable tolerability profile for the long-term treatment of these important syndromes.

An open-label study of aripiprazole: pharmacokinetics, tolerability, and effectiveness in children and adolescents with conduct disorder

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated flexible-dose pharmacokinetics, safety, and effectiveness of aripiprazole in children and adolescents with conduct disorder (CD).

METHODS

This open-label, 15-day, three-center study with an optional 36-month extension enrolled a total of 23 patients: 12 children (6-12 years) and 11 adolescents (13-17 years) with CD and a score of 2-3 on the Rating of Aggression Against People and/or Property (RAAPP). Initially, the protocol used the following dosing: subjects <25 kg, 2 mg/day; subjects 25-50 kg, 5 mg/day; subjects >50-70 kg, 10 mg/day; and subjects >70 kg, 15 mg/day. Due to vomiting and sedation, this schedule was revised to: <25 kg, 1 mg/day; 25-50 kg, 2 mg/day; >50-70 kg, 5 mg/day; and >70 kg, 10 mg/day.

RESULTS

Aripiprazole pharmacokinetics were linear, and steady state appeared to be attained within 14 days. Both groups demonstrated improvements in RAAPP scores and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) scores. Adverse events were similar to the known profile for aripiprazole in adults.

CONCLUSION

The pharmacokinetics of aripiprazole in children and adolescents are linear and comparable with those in adults. Aripiprazole was generally well-tolerated in patients with CD, particularly after protocol adjustments, with improvements in aggressive behavior.