Orally versus intramuscularly administered antipsychotic drugs in psychiatric emergencies

Strategies for optimal management of pediatric acute agitation in emergency settings

Acute agitation in youth is a challenging presentation to the emergency department. In many cases, however, youth can be behaviorally de-escalated using a combination of environmental modification and verbal de-escalation. In cases where additional strategies such as pharmacologic de-escalation or physical restraint are needed, using the least restrictive means possible, including the youth in the decision-making process, and providing options are important. This paper reviews specific considerations on the approach to a youth with acute agitation and strategies and techniques to successfully de-escalate agitated youth who pose a danger to themselves and/or others.

Improving the pharmacotherapeutic treatment of agitation associated with bipolar disorder

INTRODUCTION

Agitation is commonly encountered in people with bipolar disorder, particularly when experiencing a manic episode. The number of approved pharmacological agents to manage acute episodes of agitation in this population is limited.

AREAS COVERED

A search was conducted using the US National Library of Medicine PubMed.gov resource for English-language papers of clinical trials and reviews/meta-analyses, using the text words 'bipolar disorder' AND 'agitation,' as well as any papers with both two text words in the title, without any date restrictions.

EXPERT OPINION

Existing pharmacologic options approved by regulatory authorities for the treatment of acute episodes of agitation associated with bipolar disorder have similar degrees of efficacy but differ in their tolerability profiles and ease of use, giving clinicians an opportunity to individualize treatment. The goal is to treat mild-moderate agitation before it evolves into severe agitation, encouraging noninvasive pharmacologic treatment options. Inhaled loxapine and sublingual dexmedetomidine are newer options with rapid onset of action and may be preferable for patients willing to cooperate with treatment.

Sublingual dexmedetomidine: repurposing an anesthetic as an anti-agitation agent

INTRODUCTION

Especially when acutely ill, individuals with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder can present with agitated behavior. The initial approach to agitation management are non-pharmacologic strategies such as verbal de-escalation techniques; however, pharmacologic interventions may be needed. Dexmedetomidine is a selective alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist, and a sublingual formulation has been approved in the US for the treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder in adults.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the published literature on sublingual dexmedetomidine using the US National Library of Medicine's PubMed.gov resource. Pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy and tolerability findings are summarized. The authors also provide a discussion to its potential place in the treatment armamentarium.

EXPERT OPINION

Sublingual dexmedetomidine is an effective and well-tolerated pharmacologic option for the treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. The sublingual method of administration allows for a rapid onset of action with treatment effects beginning as early as 20 minutes after administration. Adverse effects include somnolence, hypotension, oral paresthesia, hypoesthesia, and dry mouth. Further study will be needed to evaluate sublingual dexmedetomidine in real-world patients receiving concomitant psychotropic medications.

A Critical Review of the Psychomotor Agitation Treatment in Youth

(1) Background: To systematically review evidence on the safety and efficacy of psychopharmacological treatments available for psychomotor agitation (PA) in children and adolescents. (2) Methods: Studies assessing the safety and efficacy of psychopharmacological treatments for acute PA in children and adolescents that were published between January 1984 and June 2022 on PubMed were systematically reviewed. We included: (i) papers that presented a combination of the search terms specified in the "Search strategy" sub-paragraph; (ii) manuscripts in English; (iii) original papers; (iv) prospective or retrospective/observational studies and experimental or quasi-experimental reports. The exclusion criteria were: (i) review papers; (ii) non-original studies including editorials and book reviews; (iii) studies not specifically designed and focused on the selected topic. (3) Results: We selected 42 papers: 11 case series (11/42, 26.19%), 8 chart reviews (8/42, 19.05%), 8 case reports (8/42, 19.05%), 6 double-blind placebo-controlled randomized studies (6/42, 14.29%), 4 double-blind controlled randomized studies (4/42, 9.52%), 4 open-label trials (4/42, 9.52%) and 1 case control (1/42, 2.38%). (4) Conclusions: The drugs most frequently used to treat agitation in children and adolescents were ziprasidone, risperidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine and valproic acid. Further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy/safety ratio, considering the limited number of observations in this field.

Implications of obesity for drug administration and absorption from subcutaneous and intramuscular injections: A primer

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

To discuss the potential implications of obesity for drug administration and absorption from subcutaneous (SC) and intramuscular (IM) injection sites.

SUMMARY

The SC and IM routes are useful for the parenteral administration of medications to optimize pharmacokinetic properties such as time to onset and duration of effect, for cost considerations, or for ease of administration, such as when intravenous access is unavailable. The choice of SC or IM injection depends on the specific medication, with SC administration preferred for products such as insulin where a slower and more sustained response is desirable, while IM administration is usually preferred for products such as vaccines where more rapid absorption leads to a more rapid antibody response. Obesity has the potential to influence the rate and extent of absorption, as well as adverse effects, of medications administered by the SC or IM route through changes in SC tissue composition and depth or by inadvertent administration of IM medications into SC tissue because of improper needle length. Potential adverse effects associated with IM or SC injections in addition to pain, bruising, and hematoma formation include sciatic nerve injury, particularly with IM injection in the upper outer quadrant of the buttock; bone contusion or rarely osteonecrosis if the IM injection is excessively deep; and granulomas, fat necrosis, and calcification with SC injection.

CONCLUSION

Issues related to medication absorption in obese patients are likely to become more prominent in the future with increasing approvals of a wide range of biotherapeutic agents administered by SC injection. Studies should be directed toward these and other agents to assist with dosing decisions in this challenging population.

Achievements in Thermosensitive Gelling Systems for Rectal Administration

Rectal drug delivery is an effective alternative to oral and parenteral treatments. This route allows for both local and systemic drug therapy. Traditional rectal dosage formulations have historically been used for localised treatments, including laxatives, hemorrhoid therapy and antipyretics. However, this form of drug dosage often feels alien and uncomfortable to a patient, encouraging refusal. The limitations of conventional solid suppositories can be overcome by creating a thermosensitive liquid suppository. Unfortunately, there are currently only a few studies describing their use in therapy. However, recent trends indicate an increase in the development of this modern therapeutic system. This review introduces a novel rectal drug delivery system with the goal of summarising recent developments in thermosensitive liquid suppositories for analgesic, anticancer, antiemetic, antihypertensive, psychiatric, antiallergic, anaesthetic, antimalarial drugs and insulin. The report also presents the impact of various types of components and their concentration on the properties of this rectal dosage form. Further research into such formulations is certainly needed in order to meet the high demand for modern, efficient rectal gelling systems. Continued research and development in this field would undoubtedly further reveal the hidden potential of rectal drug delivery systems.

International research into 22 years of use of chemical restraint: An evidence overview

BACKGROUND

Chemical restraint (CR) (also known as rapid tranquilisation) is the forced (non-consenting) administration of medications to manage uncontrolled aggression, anxiety, or violence in people who are likely to cause harm to themselves or others. Our population of interest was adults with mental health disorders (with/without substance abuse). There has been a growing international movement over the past 22 years towards reducing/eliminating restrictive practices such as CR. It is appropriate to summarise the research that has been published over this time, identify trends and gaps in knowledge, and highlight areas for new research to inform practice.

AIMS

To undertake a comprehensive systematic search to identify, and describe, the volume and nature of primary international research into CR published since 1995.

METHODS

This paper reports the processes and overall findings of a systematic search for all available primary research on CR published between 1 January 1996 and 31 July 2018. It describes the current evidence base by hierarchy of evidence, country (ies) producing the research, CR definitions, study purpose, and outcome measures.

RESULTS

This review identified 311 relevant primary studies (21 RCTs; 46 non-controlled experimental or prospective observational studies; 77 cross-sectional studies; 69 retrospective studies; 67 opinion pieces, position or policy statements; and 31 qualitative studies). The USA, UK, and Australia contributed over half the research, whilst cross-country collaborations comprised 6% of it. The most common research settings comprised acute psychiatric wards (23.3%), general psychiatric wards (21.6%), and general hospital emergency departments (19.0%).

DISCUSSION

A key lesson learnt whilst compiling this database of research into CR was to ensure that all papers described non-consenting administration of medications to manage adults with uncontrolled aggression, anxiety, or violence. There were tensions in the literature between using effective CR without producing adverse events, and how to decide when CR was needed (compared with choosing non-chemical intervention for behavioural emergencies), respecting patients' dignity whilst safeguarding their safety, and preserving safe workplaces for staff, and care environments for other patients. The range of outcome measures suggests opportunities to standardise future research.

A prospective, observational study of the safety and effectiveness of intramuscular psychotropic treatment in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia and bipolar mania

This naturalistic, observational pan-European study assessed the safety and early effectiveness of intramuscular (IM) psychotropic treatments in patients with acute agitation suffering from schizophrenia or bipolar mania. One thousand nine hundred and forty of 1945 patients completed the 24-hour observation period after initial IM treatment. Patients from 12 European countries were included (mean age 39 years; 58% male, 66% schizophrenia). IM treatment was at the physician's discretion. The primary objective was to describe the acute tolerability of IM psychotropic therapies in clinical practice, with particular emphasis on EPS. At baseline, 68% of the patients received IM monotherapy, with IM olanzapine most commonly prescribed (36%). During the first 24hours, 190 (9.8%) patients experienced EPS. The occurrence of EPS was statistically significantly lower in patients treated with IM olanzapine compared to those treated with other IM psychotropic medications (mainly typical antipsychotics and benzodiazepines): acute dystonia: 1.1%, 95% CI 0.5–2.3 and 2.9%, CI 2.0–4.0; akathisia: 2.3%, CI 1.3–3.7 and 5.5%, CI 4.3–6.9; Parkinsonism: 2.9%, CI 1.8–4.4 and 7.8%, CI 6.4–9.4, respectively. Anticholinergic treatment was given to 12% IM olanzapine versus 31% non-olanzapine treated patients. Acute agitation after 24hours was reduced by 1.68 (95% CI 1.46–1.91) points on the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) in IM olanzapine patients and 1.51 (95% CI 1.30–1.73) points in non-olanzapine patients. Additional psychotropic medication was required for 90% of the patients during the first 24hours of treatment. Results provide naturalistic evidence for low EPS rates and improvement of agitation with IM psychotropic medications during acute states of patients suffering from acute mania or schizophrenia.

Literature review and economic evaluation of oral and intramuscular ziprasidone treatment among patients with schizophrenia in China

Background

Over 10 million Chinese are affected by schizophrenia. The annual cost of schizophrenia in China was estimated at US$2586 per patient.

Aims

The study has two aims: (1) to conduct a targeted literature review of the economic literature on oral ziprasidone in China, and (2) to develop an inpatient economic model that compared the cost of intramuscular ziprasidone with other regimens including electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) for the management of acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia from a hospital’s perspective in China.

Methods

A targeted literature review was conducted using PubMed and the Chinese literature databases for studies published between January 2007 and December 2017. Studies that assessed costs associated with oral ziprasidone treatment for schizophrenia in China were summarised. In the inpatient economic model, cost measures included hospital room and board, antipsychotics, ECT and medications for the management of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS). Input for standard antipsychotic regimens and unit cost were obtained from the literature. Hospital length of stay (LOS), utilisation of ECT and incidence of EPS were derived from the literature and supplemented/validated with a survey of psychiatrists in China. Cost was presented in 2017 Chinese yuan.

Results

The average estimated LOS was 29 days with ziprasidone, 33 days with risperidone+benzodiazepine, 32 days with olanzapine, 35 days with haloperidol and 29 days with ECT. The cost of antipsychotics was ¥1260 with ziprasidone, ¥137 with risperidone+benzodiazepine, ¥913 with olanzapine and ¥210 with haloperidol; ECT treatment cost ¥785. The base-case analysis suggested that higher antipsychotic cost with ziprasidone was offset by savings with shorter LOS. Using intramuscular ziprasidone for acute management was associated with a total cost of ¥11 157, the lowest among all antipsychotic regimens (¥11 424 with risperidone+benzodiazepine, ¥11 711 with olanzapine and ¥11 912 with haloperidol) and slightly higher than ECT (¥10 606). The cost of antipsychotics and ECT accounted for 1 %–11 % of the total cost. Varying LOS between the lower and upper bounds of the 95% CI, the total cost was comparable between these regimens.

Conclusions

Overall, the cost for the management of acute agitation was similar between intramuscular ziprasidone and other antipsychotics. Compared with other antipsychotics, the higher medication cost of intramuscular ziprasidone can be offset by savings with shorter hospital stay. The results from this economic analysis were complementary to the findings in the published literature assessing the economic outcomes of oral ziprasidone.

Examining the safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability of inhaled loxapine for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder in adults

Agitation is a common and serious symptom of bipolar mania and schizophrenia, and can be defined as excessive motor and verbal activity. If left unrecognized and untreated, agitation can evolve into aggression, resulting in potential patient and staff injury. An ideal treatment for agitation would have a rapid onset, cause calmness without sedation, and be tolerable, efficacious, and non-coercive, while managing the underlying condition. A novel approach for the treatment of agitation is inhaled loxapine. Inhaled loxapine is rapidly absorbed into the systemic circulation through the alveoli, resulting in a near immediate onset of action. The efficacy of inhaled loxapine was established in an extensive clinical development program that included persons with schizophrenia and bipolar mania. Additionally, inhaled loxapine has comparable efficacy to intramuscular ziprasidone, olanzapine, haloperidol, aripiprazole, and lorazepam, with the added benefit of being non-painful and non-traumatizing. Inhaled loxapine carries a bolded black box warning for bronchospasm, and as a result, in the US, requires enrollment in a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy program, and is contraindicated in those with pulmonary disease. Additionally, the use of inhaled loxapine can be associated with dysgeusia and throat irritation. Inhaled loxapine requires some degree of patient cooperation, and therefore may not be appropriate for all agitated patients.

What do we really know about PRN use in agitated children with mental health conditions: a clinical review

What is the evidence that 'pro re nata' (PRN) medication is effective for ending agitated outbursts in children and adolescents in psychiatric emergency rooms or inpatient units? Literature search was performed for studies of PRN medication use in children and adolescents that included an outcome measure. One randomised controlled trial, three prospective studies and six retrospective studies that included some outcome measure were identified. Outcome measures were heterogeneous, and frequently did not use standardised metrics assessing agitation level to measure effectiveness. The single small Randomized Controlled Trial (RTC) does not find a difference between placebo and medication, and outcomes of other studies do not control for potential placebo effect of the intervention itself as opposed to the medication. There is insufficient evidence to support the common practice of PRN medications for the management of acute agitation, and no data with which to inform clinical practice, such as which medicines and doses are helpful for specific populations or situations. Psychiatrists have no evidence-based medication interventions for acutely managing agitated outbursts in children and adolescents.

Joint BAP NAPICU evidence-based consensus guidelines for the clinical management of acute disturbance: De-escalation and rapid tranquillisation

The British Association for Psychopharmacology and the National Association of Psychiatric Intensive Care and Low Secure Units developed this joint evidence-based consensus guideline for the clinical management of acute disturbance. It includes recommendations for clinical practice and an algorithm to guide treatment by healthcare professionals with various options outlined according to their route of administration and category of evidence. Fundamental overarching principles are included and highlight the importance of treating the underlying disorder. There is a focus on three key interventions: de-escalation, pharmacological interventions pre-rapid tranquillisation and rapid tranquillisation (intramuscular and intravenous). Most of the evidence reviewed relates to emergency psychiatric care or acute psychiatric adult inpatient care, although we also sought evidence relevant to other common clinical settings including the general acute hospital and forensic psychiatry. We conclude that the variety of options available for the management of acute disturbance goes beyond the standard choices of lorazepam, haloperidol and promethazine and includes oral-inhaled loxapine, buccal midazolam, as well as a number of oral antipsychotics in addition to parenteral options of intramuscular aripiprazole, intramuscular droperidol and intramuscular olanzapine. Intravenous options, for settings where resuscitation equipment and trained staff are available to manage medical emergencies, are also included.

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.

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.

Intramuscular ziprasidone versus haloperidol for managing agitation in Chinese patients with schizophrenia

Intramuscular (IM) antipsychotics are preferred for efficient control of agitation symptoms. Previous studies have demonstrated that IM ziprasidone is efficacious and safe for treatment of agitation in schizophrenia. However, clinicians now recognize that racial differences may contribute to altered therapeutic response and tolerability. This study compared the efficacy and tolerability of IM ziprasidone versus IM haloperidol for the management of agitation in Chinese subjects with schizophrenia. Subjects with acute schizophrenia were randomized to either ziprasidone (n = 189, 10 to 20 mg as required up to a maximum of 40 mg/d) or haloperidol (n = 187, 5 mg every 4 to 8 hours to a maximum of 20 mg/d) for 3 days. Psychiatric assessments and adverse events were assessed at baseline, 2, 4, 24, 48, and 72 hours. In the ziprasidone group, 2.1% of subjects discontinued versus 3.7% in the haloperidol group. The least squares mean change (SE) from baseline to 72 hours in Brief Psychiatry Rating Scale total score was -17.32 (0.7) for ziprasidone (n = 167) and -18.44 (0.7) for haloperidol (n = 152), with a 95% confidence interval treatment difference of -0.7 to 2.9. Fewer subjects experienced adverse events after ziprasidone (n = 54, 28.6%) than haloperidol (n = 116, 62.0%), with a notably higher incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms in the haloperidol group (n = 69, 36.9%) compared to the ziprasidone group (n = 4, 2.1%). For controlling agitation in schizophrenia in this Chinese study, ziprasidone had a favorable tolerability profile and comparable efficacy and safety compared to haloperidol.

Reducing seclusion through involuntary medication: a randomized clinical trial

The study evaluated whether seclusion and coercive incidents would be reduced in extent and number if involuntary medication was the first choice of intervention. Patients admitted to an acute psychiatric ward were randomly allocated to two groups. In Group 1, involuntary medication was the intervention of first choice for dealing with agitation and risk of violence. In Group 2, seclusion was the intervention of first choice. Patients' characteristics between the groups were compared by Pearson χ(2) and two-sample t-tests; the incidence rates and risk ratios (RRs) were calculated to examine differences in number and duration of coercive incidents. In Group 1, the relative risk of being secluded was lower than in Group 2, whereas the risk of receiving involuntary medication was higher. However, the mean duration of the seclusion incidents did not differ significantly between the two groups; neither did the total number of coercive incidents. Although the use of involuntary medication could successfully replace and reduce the number of seclusions, alternative interventions are needed to reduce the overall number and duration of coercive incidents. A new policy for managing acute aggression - such as involuntary medication - can be implemented effectively only if certain conditions are met.

Evaluation of behavioral changes and subjective distress after exposure to coercive inpatient interventions

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of evidence to underpin decisions on what constitutes the most effective and least restrictive form of coercive intervention when responding to violent behavior. Therefore we compared ratings of effectiveness and subjective distress by 125 inpatients across four types of coercive interventions.

METHODS

Effectiveness was assessed through ratings of patient behavior immediately after exposure to a coercive measure and 24 h later. Subjective distress was examined using the Coercion Experience Scale at debriefing. Regression analyses were performed to compare these outcome variables across the four types of coercive interventions.

RESULTS

Using univariate statistics, no significant differences in effectiveness and subjective distress were found between the groups, except that patients who were involuntarily medicated experienced significant less isolation during the measure than patients who underwent combined measures. However, when controlling for the effect of demographic and clinical characteristics, significant differences on subjective distress between the groups emerged: involuntary medication was experienced as the least distressing overall and least humiliating, caused less physical adverse effects and less sense of isolation. Combined coercive interventions, regardless of the type, caused significantly more physical adverse effects and feelings of isolation than individual interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of information on individual patient preferences, involuntary medication may be more justified than seclusion and mechanical restraint as a coercive intervention. Use of multiple interventions requires significant justification given their association with significant distress.

[Psychiatric medication as restraint: between autonomy and protection, is there place for a legal framework?]

The use of chemical restraint has been regulated for the past ten years in Quebec. However, clinical, ethical and legal issues, sometimes contradictory, have not really been considered during the legislative process leading to consolidation in its current form. The author supports that, because of the absence of consent and the effects of medication, a specific legal framework to the use of medication is necessary in a context of unplanned intervention to protect both patients and medical staff. This framework would prescribe good practice, take into account the non-medical aspects of consent to care and formalize the practice as an exception to the rule. In addition, the symbolism of law, through which social solidarity can be expressed, must not be underestimated.

The use of amisulpride in the treatment of acute psychosis

The management of acute episodes in schizophrenia is frequently initiated in the psychiatric emergency department and requires rapid intervention to relieve distress and psychiatric symptoms. Both non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions are needed to calm the patient and prevent potential harm to the patient or others. Treatment is a step-by-step process including management of behavioral symptomatology, diagnosis of potential organic causes, and evaluation of potential substance abuse. Better care is delivered if predefined standard operating procedures are adopted systematically. The ultimate goal of treatment is to establish a therapeutic alliance with the patient. Atypical antipsychotics given orally are recommended as a first-line treatment. As the treatment endpoint is calmness rather than sleep, a non-sedative antipsychotic agent is usually preferred. Drug tolerance is a major issue for the patient. Amisulpride is an effective atypical antipsychotic agent in this context. The optimal dose is 800 mg/day, which is effective on positive and negative symptoms and can be given from the first day with a low risk of extrapyramidal symptoms. Since drug-drug interactions are limited, agitation and anxiety may be controlled by short-term adjunctive therapy with benzodiazepines. In conclusion, amisulpride is an appropriate first-line treatment for the management of acute psychosis.

Pharmacologic management of acutely agitated pediatric patients

Acute agitation is a state of behavioral dyscontrol that requires intervention. Medications available in rapid delivery formats are frequently administered to treat acute agitation, either as a chemical restraint or on a voluntary basis. Prior to initiating treatment, the etiology of agitation must be evaluated. In choosing a medication, general pharmacologic principles should be followed. Medication should be selected based on the underlying cause in conjunction with weighing the risks, benefits, and side effects of medications. There are three classes of medications administered to children and adolescents to treat agitation: antihistamines, benzodiazepines, and antipsychotics. The most concerning short-term side effects of antipsychotics are their adverse neurologic effects, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, and prolonged corrected QT interval. Compared with typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics have a more favorable short-term side effect profile.

Management of patients presenting with acute psychotic episodes of schizophrenia

The initial management of patients with schizophrenia presenting to psychiatric emergency departments with an acute psychotic episode requires rapid decisions to be made by physicians concerning the treatment of individuals who are likely to be relatively uncooperative, agitated and lacking insight. The treatment decision must be adapted to the individual characteristics and needs of each patient. This article reviews the issues from the perspective of the initial management of acute psychosis as it is currently practised in Europe, and discusses the pragmatic implications for initial treatment decisions and the elaboration of a long-term treatment plan. Initially, administration of antipsychotics to control psychotic symptoms and benzodiazepines to control agitation represents the cornerstone of treatment. Oral medication is preferable to injectable forms wherever possible, and atypical antipsychotics are to be preferred over conventional agents because of their lower risk of extrapyramidal adverse effects, which are a major determinant of poor adherence to treatment. Whatever antipsychotic is chosen by the physician during the initial period, it is likely that it will need to be continued for many years, and it is thus important to take into account the long-term safety profile of the drug chosen, particularly in relation to extrapyramidal adverse effects, metabolic complications and quality of life. Building a therapeutic alliance with the patient and his/her family or carers is an important element that should be included in the initial management of psychosis. The long-term goal should be to minimize the risk of psychotic relapse through adequate treatment adherence.

Olanzapine orally disintegrating tablet vs. risperidone oral solution in the treatment of acutely agitated psychotic patients

OBJECTIVE

Efficacy and tolerability of risperidone oral solution (RIS-OS) and olanzapine orally disintegrating tablet (OLZ-ODT) were compared for the treatment of acute psychotic agitation.

METHOD

During a 2-month period, patients scoring > or =15 on the Excited Component for Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS-EC) were assigned to treatment with OLZ-ODT (n=34) or RIS-OS (n=53) on psychiatric emergency situations, and assessed every 15 min.

RESULTS

Two (OLZ-ODT and RIS-OS) by five (0-, 15-, 30-, 45- and 60-min time points) repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed only a significant main effect of time course on PANSS-EC (F=82.2, P<.0001). No differences in the number of patients receiving additional injection due to worsening were found (OLZ-ODT, 11.8%; RIS-OS, 9.4%). No differences in rate of extrapyramidal symptoms and patient satisfaction with assigned treatment were found. However, patients in the OLZ-ODT group recovered significantly more from tachycardia than those in the RIS-OS group (t=2.17, P=.03).

CONCLUSION

OLZ-ODT and RIS-OS treatments yielded similar improvements in acutely agitated patients who accepted oral medication. However, on one physiological parameter (i.e., tachycardia) OLZ-ODT might be superior to RIS-OS. Physiological indicators may also be useful for measuring levels of agitation.

Pharmacological control of acute agitation: focus on intramuscular preparations

Acute agitation in the psychiatric emergency setting is a common presentation, which can endanger the patient, caregivers and professional staff. Rapid and effective treatment, followed by ongoing evaluation and maintenance treatment where appropriate, is key to circumvent negative outcomes. Nonpharmacological measures are the first step in treating the acutely agitated patient, and include verbal intervention and physical restraint. Pharmacological treatment is often required to ensure the safety of the patient, caregivers and the treatment team. The need for drug delivery in uncooperative patients favours the use of intramuscular preparations for the acutely agitated patient. Intramuscular treatment options include benzodiazepines, conventional antipsychotics and atypical antipsychotics. Each of these medications offers a unique pharmacological profile that must be considered when treating acutely agitated patients, who may be unwilling or unable to accurately communicate their co-morbid conditions and concomitant medications.

Oral risperidone, olanzapine and quetiapine versus haloperidol in psychotic agitation

PURPOSE

Acute agitation is a common presentation in emergency departments and is often secondary to an underlying psychotic condition. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of three second generation antipsychotics (risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine) versus haloperidol in the treatment of psychotic agitation for up to 72 h.

GENERAL METHODS

We recruited 101 patients with acute psychosis who were admitted at the Mental Health Department 1 South of Turin, Psychiatric Emergency Service of San Giovanni Battista Hospital, from June 2004 to June 2005.

FINDINGS

Aggressive behavior, as measured by Modified Overt Aggression Scale and Hostility-suspiciousness factor derived from the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, significantly improved in all groups, with no significant between-group differences. Extrapyramidal symptoms were more common in haloperidol treated patients compared with patients receiving risperidone, olanzapine or quetiapine.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that in the clinical practice setting of emergency psychiatry olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine are as effective as haloperidol and better tolerated.

Rapid dose initiation of quetiapine for the treatment of acute schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: a randomised, multicentre, parallel-group, open study

OBJECTIVE

Rapid resolution of symptoms is a priority for clinicians treating acute psychosis, and rapid initiation of pharmacotherapy may prove beneficial. This study examined rapid dose initiation of quetiapine in acutely ill patients.

METHODS

A 2-week, multicentre, randomised, parallel-group, open study. Inpatients (n = 269) diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder received rapid (n = 139) or conventional (n = 130) initiation of quetiapine, followed by flexible dosing (maximum 800 mg/day). Primary outcome included proportion of patients experiencing > or =1 episode of selected AEs (somnolence, dizziness, orthostatic hypotension) during Week 1. Secondary outcomes included discontinuations due to AEs, and efficacy assessed by BPRS and CGI-S scores.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with > or =1 selected AE during Week 1 was 5.4% and 10.1% in the conventional and rapid initiation groups, respectively. Most common AEs (>5% patients) were hypotension, tachycardia, somnolence and sedation. Overall, four (3.1%) and three (2.1%) patients from the conventional and rapid initiation group, respectively, withdrew due to AEs. BPRS and CGI-S scores decreased significantly (p < 0.001) from baseline in both groups.

CONCLUSION

A higher proportion of patients experienced AEs with rapid initiation of quetiapine (800 mg/day by Day 4), although withdrawals due to AEs were comparable. Rapid initiation of quetiapine was generally well tolerated and effective in this setting.

Efficacy and safety of oral aripiprazole compared with haloperidol in patients transitioning from acute treatment with intramuscular formulations

OBJECTIVE

To report efficacy and safety of transitioning patients receiving intramuscular (IM) formulations of aripiprazole or haloperidol to their respective oral formulations.

METHODS

448 agitated patients with schizophrenia (73%) or schizoaffective disorder (27%) were randomized to receive aripiprazole IM 9.75 mg, haloperidol IM 6.5 mg, or placebo IM within 24 hours. Patients treated with aripiprazole IM or haloperidol IM who completed this 24-hour IM phase were transitioned to the respective blinded oral formulations for 4 days (aripiprazole 10-15 mg/day, n = 153; haloperidol 7.5-10 mg/day, n = 151). Patients treated with placebo IM were transitioned to oral aripiprazole (analysis not included). The primary efficacy measure was mean change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PEC) score from baseline of oral phase (last value from 24-hour IM phase) to endpoint (study day 5, last observation carried forward).

RESULTS

During the oral phase, aripiprazole 15 mg and haloperidol 10 mg were both effective in maintaining responses achieved on all efficacy measures during the 24-hour IM phase. Mean improvements in PEC scores from study day 1 to 5 were -1.37 for aripiprazole and -1.40 for haloperidol (p = NS for aripiprazole versus haloperidol). Oral aripiprazole was well tolerated. Extrapyramidal symptom-related adverse events were lower for aripiprazole (1.3%) than haloperidol (8.0%). Nausea and vomiting occurred more frequently in patients receiving aripiprazole (3.9% and 2.6%, respectively) than in those receiving haloperidol (0.7% and 1.3%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder treated with aripiprazole IM or haloperidol IM demonstrated similar effective and safe transition to their respective oral formulations. Initial benefits of reduced agitation and improved clinical status during the IM phase of the study were maintained throughout the oral phase of the study with good tolerability.

Intramuscular aripiprazole in the control of agitation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate response to intramuscular (IM) aripiprazole injections using secondary analyses from clinical trials.

METHODS

Data from one trial in patients with bipolar I disorder and two trials in patients with schizophrenia were assembled and used for three secondary analyses. Analysis 1 looked at data from "nonsedated" patients (i.e., patients with scores < 8 [deep sleep] or 9 [unarousable] on the Agitation-Calmness Evaluation Scale [ACES]). In analysis 2, patients were subdivided into "higher" and "lower" agitation groups according to a median split on the baseline score for the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Excited Component (PEC) (median = 18). Analysis 3 looked at the patients who received a second injection within the 24-hour study period. In each analysis, the mean change from baseline in PEC scores was re-evaluated.

RESULTS

Analysis 1 found that nonsedated patients with bipolar I disorder and schizophrenia showed significant decreases in PEC scores following treatment with aripiprazole IM (p < 0.005). Analysis 2 found that aripiprazole IM significantly reduced agitation compared with placebo in patients with bipolar I disorder who had lower baseline agitation (p < 0.01), while patients with bipolar I disorder who had higher baseline agitation showed similarly large PEC decreases with aripiprazole (-9.9) and placebo (-7.9). Patients with schizophrenia showed significant reductions in PEC scores compared with placebo regardless of baseline level of agitation (p < 0.01). Analysis 3 found that a second injection of aripiprazole IM significantly reduced agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder or schizophrenia (p < 0.05); repeated injections were safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Improvements with aripiprazole IM appeared to be specific to core agitation symptoms, as opposed to nonspecific sedation, and to be independent of baseline level of agitation. Furthermore, patients benefited from a repeated aripiprazole injection when clinically warranted. These results address important clinical issues regarding use of aripiprazole IM in treating agitation.

Emergency management of agitation in pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to better understand how agitated pregnant women are pharmacologically managed in a psychiatric emergency service (PES).

METHOD

A retrospective chart review was conducted on 80 women admitted to a PES with HCG-positive urine, from January 1, 2004, to June 30, 2005. Of these, 31 patients required medication for agitation. We describe the demographics (age, ethnicity, housing status, insurance status), chief complaint, medical status, drug use and medical management in the PES, as well as pregnancy awareness, prenatal care and trimester. Patient data were analyzed using simple frequency calculations and cross tabulations with SPSS.

RESULTS

Thirty-one (39%) patients received 34 doses of psychotropic medication. Haloperidol, alone or in combination with a benzodiazepine, was the most frequently administered psychotropic medication, while risperidone was the second most commonly administered medication. Two patients required brief restraint for assaultive behavior that was unresponsive to any other intervention.

CONCLUSION

There are algorithms that provide guidance to clinicians regarding the pharmacological management of aggression. However, there are no efficacy or safety studies that recommend strategies for the management of the agitated pregnant patient.