Comparison of intramuscular olanzapine, orally disintegrating olanzapine tablets, oral risperidone solution, and intramuscular haloperidol in the management of acute agitation in an acute care psychiatric ward in Taiwan

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Pearls for Caring for the Boarding Psychiatric Patient in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Emergency department (ED) boarding of psychiatric patients is a national issue that continues to worsen at a disturbing rate. Implementing strategies in the ED to provide continuous care for patients can help secure patient safety.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to discuss the boarding of psychiatric patients and its implications. It will focus on executing best clinical practices in managing boarding psychiatric patients in the ED. It will not focus on the treatment of substance use disorders.

DISCUSSION

This article will address the pearls for management plans that can be implemented in the ED, alongside discussing pregnant and elderly patients. Risk factors, complications, and treatments for boarding psychiatric patients are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with psychiatric disorders boarding in the ED need careful consideration of management plans to mitigate patient safety events.

Feasibility and Safety of Oral Risperidone to Treat Prehospital Agitation

Objective: Agitation is a common prehospital problem and frequently presents without a clear etiology. Given the dynamic environment of the prehospital setting, there has historically been a varied approach to treating agitation with a heavy reliance on parenteral medications. Newer best practice guidelines recommend the incorporation of oral medications to treat patients experiencing agitation. Therefore, we evaluated the use of oral risperidone in a single system after a change in protocol occurred.Methods: This was conducted as a retrospective chart review of an urban/suburban Emergency Medical Services system over the period of 8 months. The first day this medication was implemented throughout the service was included. Charts were included for selection if they included risperidone oral dissolving tablet (ODT) as a charted medication. The primary outcome was administration of additional medications to treat agitation. Exploratory outcome measures included acceptance of medication, documented injury to paramedics, documented injuries to patients, scene times, and adverse events that could possibly be linked to the medication.Results: A total of 552 records were screened for inclusion. Risperidone was offered to 530 patients and accepted by 512 (96.6%). Of these 512 patients, the median age of included patients was 39 years old (IQR 29-52 years old) with a range of 18-89 years old. Rescue or additional medications for agitation were required in 9 (1.8%) cases. There were a total of 4 (0.8%) potential complications following administration of risperidone. There were no reported assaults with subsequent injuries to prehospital personnel or injuries sustained by patients reported in this study.Conclusions: Risperidone ODT was found to be a safe and effective medication to treat mild agitation in a large urban and suburban EMS system. The need for additional medications to treat agitation was rare and there were no documented injuries to either patients or paramedics.

Quantifying the effects of practicing a semantic task according to subclinical schizotypy

The learning ability of individuals within the schizophrenia spectrum is crucial for their psychosocial rehabilitation. When selecting a treatment, it is thus essential to consider the impact of medications on practice effects, an important type of learning ability. To achieve this end goal, a pre-treatment test has to be developed and tested in healthy participants first. This is the aim of the current work, which takes advantage of the schizotypal traits present in these participants to preliminary assess the test's validity for use among patients. In this study, 47 healthy participants completed the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire (SPQ) and performed a semantic categorization task twice, with a 1.5-hour gap between sessions. Practice was found to reduce reaction times (RTs) in both low- and high-SPQ scorers. Additionally, practice decreased the amplitudes of the N400 event-related brain potentials elicited by semantically matching words in low SPQ scorers only, which shows the sensitivity of the task to schizotypy. Across the two sessions, both RTs and N400 amplitudes had good test-retest reliability. This task could thus be a valuable tool. Ongoing studies are currently evaluating the impact of fully deceptive placebos and of real antipsychotic medications on these practice effects. This round of research should subsequently assist psychiatrists in making informed decisions about selecting the most suitable medication for the psychosocial rehabilitation of a patient.

Intranasal administration of olanzapine has beneficial outcome in a rat activity-based anorexia model

The atypical antipsychotic drug olanzapine is prescribed despite clinical studies on olanzapine treatment showing mixed results on treatment efficacy in anorexia nervosa. We investigated the effect of systemic and intranasal administration of olanzapine in the activity-based anorexia (ABA) model. Rats were habituated to a running wheel and exposed to the ABA model while treated with olanzapine. During ABA rats had 1.5 h of daily access to food and ad libitum access to a running wheel for seven consecutive days. Olanzapine was administered via an osmotic minipump (1, 2.75, and 7.5 mg/kg) or intranasally 2 h before dark onset (1 and 2.75 mg/kg). We monitored body weight, food intake, wheel revolutions, body temperature, and adipose tissue. We found 2.75 and 7.5 mg/kg systemic olanzapine decreased wheel revolutions during ABA. Relative adipose tissue mass was increased in the 7.5 mg/kg olanzapine-treated group while body weight, food intake, and body temperature were unaltered by the systemic olanzapine. 1 and 2.75 mg/kg intranasal olanzapine diminished wheel revolutions and body temperature during the first 2 h after administration. The intranasal olanzapine-treated rats had a higher body weight at the end of ABA. We find that olanzapine has beneficial outcomes in the ABA via two administration routes by acting mainly on running wheel activity. Intranasal olanzapine showed a rapid effect in the first hours after administration in reducing locomotor activity. We recommend further exploring intranasal administration of olanzapine in anorectic patients to assist them in coping with restlessness.

Psychopharmacology of agitation in acute psychotic and manic episodes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide updated guidance for the medication treatment of acute agitation in the setting of psychosis or mania on inpatient psychiatric units.

RECENT FINDINGS

This topic presented challenges: studies are sparse, tend to be under-powered, and are difficult to compare. Though there have been few recent studies, there have been several recent meta-analyses, Cochrane reviews, and published guidelines that sift through the primarily older evidence as well as more recent trials. The reviewers often do not agree on what seems to have the best evidence for efficacy and safety.

SUMMARY

We conclude that the best approach is to summarize in some detail the evidence for each possible treatment and the interpretations published recently on each of those treatments, and then present recommendations for medication management in tiered rankings, based on the authors' qualitative review of the data and opinions. For oral treatment, the first-tier options are (alphabetically) haloperidol with lorazepam, lorazepam alone, and olanzapine. The second tier includes haloperidol with promethazine, loxapine inhaler, and risperidone alone. Tier 3 includes asenapine and quetiapine. For intramuscular treatment, the first-tier includes haloperidol plus promethazine, and olanzapine alone, and the second-tier includes haloperidol with lorazepam, and lorazepam alone.

Decline in Pediatric Emergency Department Behavioral Team Activations After Institution of an Agitation Protocol

OBJECTIVE

Aggressive behavior among pediatric patients with psychiatric complaints in emergency departments is a growing problem. An agitation protocol was instituted in 1 pediatric emergency department to provide scaled recommendations for differing levels of aggression. The study objective was to determine if the frequency of activation of an emergency behavioral response team changed after protocol initiation.

METHODS

A protocol for escalating management of agitation in pediatric patients was introduced in February 2016. The electronic medical record was queried for subsequent behavioral response team activations over the next 16 months. Patient demographics and specific features surrounding the activation were retrospectively recorded from the medical record, including length of stay, medications administered, and documented deescalation techniques. Frequency and features of behavioral team activations were compared with activations from a period before the planning and implementation of the protocol (May 2014 to May 2015).

RESULTS

Twenty-one patient visits were found to require behavioral response team activation over 16 months, compared with 31 for the 13-month preprotocol period. Attempts at verbal/ environmental redirection were seen in 77% and deescalation by medication administration before the activation occurred in 14% of patients. During the behavioral team activation, 81% of the patients were given psychiatric medications and 81% were placed in physical restraints.

CONCLUSIONS

A decrease from a baseline of 2.4 to 1.3 behavioral response team activations per month, or a 46% decline, was noted following the institution of a clinical protocol for pediatric agitation.

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

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

The Use of Rapid Tranquilization in Aggressive Behavior

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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.

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.

Janssen in China and insights in treating schizophrenia

This Cochrane review supports existing recommendations for risperidone and advances understanding of the use of valproate in patients with schizophrenia who are agitated or aggressive.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

J.C. conducted clinical trials of antipsychotics sponsored by Janssen Pharmaceuticals between 1978 and 1998 and met Dr Paul Janssen.

Characteristics of Involuntarily Admitted Patients and Treatment Patterns Over a 21-Year Observation Period

BACKGROUND

Patients suffering from psychiatric disorders are often treated in locked psychiatric units owing to psychomotor agitation, hostility and aggressive behavior, or suicidality. Because of legal conditions, investigations of these acutely ill patients are difficult, and many studies do not represent real-life psychiatry. In Austria, admission to a locked psychiatric unit is regulated by a national law for involuntary admission, which came into effect in 1991. The current retrospective study investigated the management of patients who were admitted involuntarily to an academic treatment center after the inauguration of this law.

METHODS

Data collection comprised all admissions to a locked unit at the Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics of the Medical University Innsbruck in the years 1992, 1997, 2002, 2007, and 2012. Demographics, admission diagnosis, current danger posed to self or others, and the initial psychopharmacological intervention were assessed.

RESULTS

The rate of admissions to a locked unit increased significantly throughout the course of the study, and the length of stay decreased from 8.57 days in 1997 to 6.43 days in 2012. Most patients received medication orally. Dosage of antipsychotics and benzodiazepines decreased throughout the investigation period. Self-endangering patients were treated with somewhat (nonsignificantly) higher benzodiazepine and significantly lower antipsychotic mean doses than patients posing danger to others.

CONCLUSIONS

Although dosage of medication was reduced, the duration of stay in a locked unit decreased significantly over the investigated years. These findings suggest that a carefully considered pharmacological treatment may be at least as effective as a more aggressive approach.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Effects of atypical antipsychotic drugs on QT interval in patients with mental disorders

Background

Drug-induced QT prolongation is associated with higher risk of cardiac arrhythmias and cardiovascular mortality. We investigated the effects of atypical antipsychotic drugs on QT interval in children and adults with mental disorders.

Methods

We conducted random-effects direct frequentist meta-analyses of aggregate data from randomized controlled trials (RCT) and appraised the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Our search in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, and PharmaPendium up to October 2017 identified studies that examined aripiprazole, quetiapine, risperidone, olanzapine, ziprasidone and brexpiprazole.

Results

Low quality evidence suggests that aripiprazole (four meta-analyses and twelve RCTs), brexpiprazole (one systematic review and four RCTs) or olanzapine (five meta-analyses and twenty RCTs) do not increase QT interval. Low quality evidence suggests that ziprasidone (five meta-analyses and 11 RCTs) increases QT interval and the rates of QT prolongation while risperidone (four meta-analyses, 70 RCTs) and quetiapine (two meta-analyses and seven RCTs) are associated with QT prolongation and greater odds of torsades de pointes ventricular tachycardia especially in cases of drug overdose.

Conclusions

The main conclusion of our study is that in people with mental disorders and under treatment with atypical antipsychotic drugs, in order to avoid QT prolongation and reduce the risk of ventricular tachycardia clinicians may recommend aripiprazole, brexpiprazole or olanzapine in licensed doses. Long-term comparative safety needs to be established.

Importance of intervention timing in the effectiveness of antipsychotics

The use of early pharmacological intervention in treating young patients with schizophrenia is a debating issue for psychiatrists. However, on the basis of developmental theory, early antipsychotic intervention can be beneficial in terms of protecting neurons from further deterioration. This study investigated whether the initiation of second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) treatment at a younger age can effectively reverse schizophrenia-relevant behavioral and neurochemical features, namely acoustic prepulse inhibition (PPI) and accumbal dopamine (DA) efflux, respectively. Risperidone (RIS, 1mg/kg/day) or olanzapine (OLA, 2.5mg/kg/day) was administered for 6weeks in rats subjected to isolation rearing (IR) in adolescence or young adulthood. Behavioral testing was performed at 3 and 5 (for locomotor activity) and 2 and 4 (for PPI) weeks after the initiation of the pharmacological regimen. An additional PPI test was performed 6weeks after the initiation of the pharmacological regimen to assess the acute add-on effect of RIS or OLA. Dopamine (DA) efflux of the nucleus accumbens was evaluated through in vivo microdialysis at the end of the study, for measuring both the baseline levels after the chronic regimen and the responsiveness to acute add-on RIS or OLA treatment. Our results demonstrated that the effects of SGAs on PPI and accumbal DA efflux were dissociated. Specifically, RIS intervention was more beneficial for adolescent than young adult IR rats in restoring their PPI deficit, whereas OLA was age-independently effective in stimulating the accumbal DA efflux. Both PPI and accumbal DA could be employed to reflect IR-induced abnormalities, in which accumbal DA appeared to be more suitable in depicting the long-term effect of IR, whereas PPI might be a more accurate biological index for revealing the advantages of early RIS intervention.

Approach to the Agitated Emergency Department Patient

BACKGROUND

Acute agitation is a common occurrence in the emergency department (ED) that requires rapid assessment and management.

OBJECTIVE

This review provides an evidence-based summary of the current ED evaluation and management of acute agitation.

DISCUSSION

Acute agitation is an increasingly common presentation to the ED and has a broad differential diagnosis including metabolic, neurologic, infectious, toxicologic, and psychiatric etiologies. Missed diagnosis of a dangerous etiology of the patient's agitation may result in severe morbidity and mortality. Assessment and management of the agitated patient should occur concurrently. Focused history and physical examination are recommended, though control of the patient's agitation may be required. All patients should receive a point-of-care glucose test, with additional testing depending upon the specific patient presentation. Initial management should involve verbal de-escalation techniques, followed by pharmacologic interventions, with physical restraints reserved as a last resort. Pharmacologic options include first-generation antipsychotics, second-generation antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, and ketamine. Finally, the management of pediatric, pregnant, and elderly patients warrants special consideration.

CONCLUSION

Acute agitation is an important presentation that requires prompt recognition and treatment. A focused and thorough examination coupled with appropriate management strategies can assist emergency clinicians to safely and effectively manage these patients.

Effectiveness and safety of oral olanzapine treatment transitioned from rapid-acting intramuscular olanzapine for agitation associated with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral olanzapine treatment transitioned from rapid-acting intramuscular olanzapine (RAIM) in patients with acute agitation associated with schizophrenia in a real-world clinical setting.

METHODS

The postmarketing surveillance study with a 3-day observational period after the last RAIM administration was conducted (original study). Following this, an extended study was added for patients who received oral olanzapine after RAIM administration during the original study period, in order to additionally observe them for 7 days after initial RAIM administration. Effectiveness and safety from initial RAIM administration were evaluated using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component score and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), respectively.

RESULTS

The effectiveness and safety analysis set included a total of 521 and 522 patients, respectively. A majority of patients received 10 mg of RAIM (475/522 patients, 91.0%). The mean ± SD total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component score was 23.6±6.2 (n=318) at baseline (before initial RAIM administration), 17.4±6.8 (n=280) at 2 hours after initial administration, 16.2±6.8 (n=246) 2 days after final administration, 14.9±6.2 (n=248) 3 days after final administration, 13.8±5.9 (n=242) 4 days after final administration, 13.2±5.8 (n=221) 7 days after initial administration, and 13.4±6.2 (n=351) at final observation (with the last observation carried forward approach), showing that reduction in agitation seen with RAIM was sustained with oral dose of olanzapine. The most common TEAEs were dyslalia and somnolence (each event occurred in four patients), and abnormal hepatic function and constipation (occurred in three patients). One serious adverse event of sudden cardiac death occurred after transitioned to oral olanzapine with many other antipsychotic drugs.

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia, RAIM could be generally transitioned to oral olanzapine without exacerbating adverse events or losing treatment effect.

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.

Oral Medication for Agitation of Psychiatric Origin: A Scoping Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Understanding more about the efficacy and safety of oral second-generation antipsychotic medications in reducing the symptoms of acute agitation could improve the treatment of psychiatric emergencies.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scoping review was to examine the evidence base underlying expert consensus panel recommendations for the use of oral second-generation antipsychotics to treat acute agitation in mentally ill patients.

METHODS

The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register was searched for randomized controlled trials comparing oral second-generation antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, or first-generation antipsychotics with or without adjunctive benzodiazepines, irrespective of route of administration of the drug being compared. Six articles were included in the final review.

RESULTS

Two oral second-generation antipsychotic medications were studied across the six included trials. While the studies had relatively small sample sizes, oral second-generation antipsychotics were similarly effective to intramuscular first-generation antipsychotics in treating symptoms of acute agitation and had similar side-effect profiles.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review identified six randomized trials investigating the use of oral second-generation antipsychotic medications in the reduction of acute agitation among patients experiencing psychiatric emergencies. Further research will be necessary to make clinical recommendations due to the overall dearth of randomized trials, as well as the small sample sizes of the included studies.

Patient preferences for medicine administration for acute agitation: results from an internet-based survey of patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia in two Nordic countries

The objective was to elicit patient preferences for medicine administration method in the management of acute agitation episodes among patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. The patients' experiences of acute agitation episodes and their management of episodes were also explored. Data were collected via an anonymous, internet-based survey of residents in Denmark or Sweden with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder (October 2014 to December 2014). Inclusion criteria were having a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, and being above 18 years of age. The questionnaire included questions about preferences for medication attributes, experiences with pharmacological treatment for agitation and involvement in treatment plans. A total of 237 diagnosed patients (61 with schizophrenia; 176 with bipolar disorder) completed the questionnaire. Agitation episodes were experienced by 90% of the respondents. In total, 83% of the respondents reported having received treatment with tablets. When patients were presented with the attributes of an inhalation method, respondents stated that the fast onset of action, low risk of adverse reactions and least invasive form of drug delivery were positive attributes of treatment with inhalation. Inhalation is a new delivery route for treatment of acute agitation in patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. Inhalation is the preferred treatment method for acute agitation among Danish and Swedish patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia.

Effects of asenapine on agitation and hostility in adults with acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is associated with an increased risk of aggression. However, effective management of hostility and/or agitation symptoms may prevent patients from becoming violent. This analysis investigated the efficacy of the antipsychotic asenapine on hostility and agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder.

METHODS

Data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III trials of asenapine in adults with manic or mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder (NCT00159744, NCT00159796, and NCT00764478). Post hoc analyses assessed the changes from baseline to day 21 on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) hostility-related item scores in asenapine- or placebo-treated patients with at least minimal or mild symptom severity and on the PANSS-excited component (PANSS-EC) total score in agitated patients. Changes were adjusted for improvements in overall mania symptoms to investigate direct effects on hostility.

RESULTS

Significantly greater changes in favor of asenapine versus placebo were observed in YMRS hostility-related item scores (irritability: least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval] =-0.5 [-0.87, -0.22], P=0.001; disruptive-aggressive behavior: -0.7 [-0.99, -0.37], P<0.0001), PANSS hostility item score (-0.2 [-0.44, -0.04]; P=0.0181), and PANSS-EC total score (-1.4 [-2.4, -0.4]; P=0.0055). Changes in the YMRS disruptive-aggressive behavior score and the sum of the hostility-related items remained significant after adjusting for improvements in other YMRS item scores.

CONCLUSION

Asenapine significantly reduced hostility and agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder; improvement was at least partially independent of overall improvement on mania symptoms.

The effect of the medicine administration route on health-related quality of life: Results from a time trade-off survey in patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia in 2 Nordic countries

BACKGROUND

Agitation episodes are common among patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Oral and intramuscular administration methods are commonly used in pharmacological treatment of acute agitation. Recently, an innovative inhalation product with loxapine(Adasuve®)has become available for treatment of acute agitation episodes associated with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. The objective for the present study was to investigate the impact of the pharmacological treatment's administration methods on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia in Denmark and Sweden using a time trade-off (TTO) approach.

METHODS

The TTO methodology was used to examine the HRQoL impact of administration method of pharmacological treatment of acute agitation. Data were collected via an internet-based survey, using an existing panel of respondents with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

RESULTS

Respondents considered living with schizophrenia/ bipolar disorder, having one yearly agitation episode treated with inhaler better than living with the same conditions and receiving treatment with tablet or injection. The utility value was 0.762 for inhalable treatment, 0.707 for injection and 0.734 for tablet treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' preference for treatment delivery options showed that inhalation was associated with a significant utility gain when compared to injection or tablets. Inhalable loxapine may be a new tool for control of agitation episodes for strengthening the patient provider alliance when taking patient's preference for delivery method into consideration.

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.

Rapid tranquillisation of acutely disturbed and violent patients: a retrospective cohort examination of 24 patients on a psychiatric intensive care unit

The prevalence of violent behaviour within acute psychiatric services is about 10%.

Aim

To identify the pharmacological management of acutely disturbed behaviour in patients requiring rapid tranquillisation (RT) on a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU). Socio-demographic and clinical characteristics were also identified in these patients.

Method and objectives

A retrospective cohort examination was carried out of 24 patients receiving RT, average age of 38.8 years (7 women and 17 men), admitted to the PICU between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2011. Patient records and hospital incident reporting system were used to obtain relevant data for analysis.

Results

The majority of patients were detained (95%); suffering from schizophrenia (45.8%); bipolar disorder (25%) and substance misuse disorders (12.5%). Verbal aggression (58.3%) and threatening behaviour (29.2%) were the most common factors leading to RT. Fourteen patients (58.3%) were medicated with a combination of haloperidol and lorazepam; nine (37.5%) with zuclopenthixol acetate only; and one (4.2%) with a combination of zuclopenthixol and promethazine.

Conclusion

Haloperidol in combination with lorazepam was the most common medication utilised for RT. Nevertheless, zuclopenthixol acetate alone, or combined with other drugs, was used in over 40% of cases. This finding is in considerable variation with recommended guidelines.

Intramuscular olanzapine for agitated patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of intramuscular (IM)-olanzapine (OLA-IM) versus controls in agitated patients. The risk ratio, number-needed-to-treat/harm, and standardized mean difference based on a random effects model were calculated. We identified 13 RCTs (19 comparisons) as follows: 7 comparisons with 1059 patients for OLA-IM versus placebo; 5 comparisons with 613 patients for OLA-IM versus haloperidol (HAL)-IM; 2 comparisons with 108 patients for OLA-IM versus ziprasidone (ZIP)-IM; 2 comparisons with 110 patients for OLA-IM versus HAL-IM plus midazolam; and 3 comparisons with 412 patients for OLA-IM versus HAL-IM plus promethazine, 2 comparisons with 355 patients for OLA-IM versus lorazepam-IM (LOR-IM); and 1 comparison with 67 patients for OLA-IM versus HAL-IM plus LOR-IM. OLA-IM was superior to placebo in both Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) and Agitation-Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES) scores 2 h after first injection, and had a comparable side effect profile, including over sedation, extrapyramidal symptoms, akathisia, and anticholinergic use. While there was no significant difference in PANSS-EC scores after 2 h between OLA-IM and HAL-IM, OLA-IM outperformed HAL-IM in ACES after 2 h. Compared with HAL-IM, OLA-IM was associated with fewer side effects, including anticholinergic use, akathisia, extrapyramidal symptoms, and dystonia, and marginally less QT prolongation compared with HAL-IM. Based on our findings, OLA-IM is preferable to HAL-IM for the treatment of agitated patients. However, comparator data for ZIP-IM, LOR-IM and HAL-IM combination therapy were insufficient.

Challenges of managing pediatric mental health crises in the emergency department

Children with mental health problems are increasingly being evaluated and treated in pediatric clinical settings. This article focuses on the epidemiology, evaluation, and management of the 2 most common pediatric mental health emergencies, suicidal and homicidal/aggressive patients, as well as the equally challenging population of children with autism or other developmental disabilities.

A double-blind, randomized comparison study of efficacy and safety of intramuscular olanzapine and intramuscular haloperidol in patients with schizophrenia and acute agitated behavior

Studies of intramuscular (IM) olanzapine in Asian and Taiwanese populations are limited. This study examined the efficacy and safety of IM olanzapine in Taiwanese patients with schizophrenia and acute agitated behavior.This was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel study comparing the efficacy and safety of 10 mg/d IM olanzapine (n = 25) against 7.5 mg/d haloperidol (n = 24). The primary objective was to assess the change of agitation from baseline to 2 hours after the first IM injection on the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale-Excited Component Scale.The changes of Positive and Negative Symptom Scale-Excited Component Scale score from baseline to 2 hours after the first IM injection did not show statistically significant difference between study groups (olanzapine -9.0 ± 5.7, haloperidol -7.9 ± 4.0, P = 0.254). Both groups reported insomnia as the most common treatment-emergent adverse event, and no serious adverse event was reported.Intramuscular olanzapine and IM haloperidol are similarly effective antipsychotic agents in treating agitated symptoms in Taiwanese patients with schizophrenia. Both IM olanzapine and IM haloperidol were proven to be safe and well tolerated, which also provided alternative options in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia with agitation.

Rapid tranquilization of severely agitated patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders: a naturalistic, rater-blinded, randomized, controlled study with oral haloperidol, risperidone, and olanzapine

INTRODUCTION

Agitation is a major problem in acute schizophrenia. Only a few studies have tested antipsychotic agents in severely agitated patients, mainly because of legal issues. Furthermore, most studies were limited to the first 24 hours. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of oral haloperidol, risperidone, and olanzapine in reducing psychotic agitation in severely agitated patients with schizophrenia or schizophreniform or schizoaffective disorder over 96 hours using a prospective, randomized, rater-blinded, controlled design within a naturalistic treatment regimen.

METHODS

In total, 43 severely agitated patients at acute care psychiatric units were enrolled. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either daily haloperidol 15 mg, olanzapine 20 mg, or risperidone 2 to 6 mg over 5 days. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale psychotic agitation subscale score was the primary outcome variable. A mixed-model analysis was applied.

RESULTS

All drugs were effective for rapid tranquilization within 2 hours. Over 5 days, the course differed between agents (P < 0.001), but none was superior. Dropouts occurred only in the risperidone and olanzapine groups. Men responded better to treatment than did women during the initial 2 hours (P = 0.046) as well as over the 5-day course (P < 0.001). No difference between drug groups was observed regarding diazepam or biperiden use.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral haloperidol, risperidone, and olanzapine seem to be suitable for treating acute severe psychotic agitation in schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Response to oral antipsychotics demonstrated a gender effect with poorer outcome in women throughout the study.

Clinical utility of orally disintegrating olanzapine in Chinese patients with schizophrenia: a review of effectiveness, patient preference, adherence, and other properties

The primary objective of this systematic review was to examine the evidence for the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of orally disintegrating olanzapine in Chinese populations. A systematic literature search was conducted using databases covering international and Chinese journals, ClinicalTrials.gov, and internal and external trial registries at Eli Lilly and Company using search terms related to target countries (People's Republic of China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan) and orally disintegrating olanzapine treatment. A publication and one clinical study report were retrieved. The clinical study showed orally disintegrating olanzapine and the standard oral tablet to have similar efficacy and tolerability profiles. A bioequivalence study has shown that orally disintegrating olanzapine and the standard oral tablet have similar pharmacokinetic profiles. Orally disintegrating olanzapine and the standard oral tablet have similar efficacy and tolerability profiles.

A naturalistic comparison study of the efficacy and safety of intramuscular olanzapine, intramuscular haloperidol, and intramuscular levomepromazine in acute agitated patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

This study was a comparative investigation of the clinical efficacy and safety of intramuscular (IM) olanzapine, IM haloperidol, and IM levomepromazine in acute agitated patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

The subjects were 122 inpatients. Their clinical symptoms were assessed using Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Excited Component (PANSS-EC), PANSS, and Agitation-Calmness Evaluation Scale, and their safety were assessed using the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale, Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS), and Drug-induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale (DIEPSS).

RESULTS

The mean changes from baseline on the PANSS-EC, Agitation-Calmness Evaluation Scale, Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale, BARS, and DIEPSS scores were significantly better in both IM olanzapine and IM levomepromazine than in IM haloperidol. Of these, the mean changes from baseline on the BARS and DIEPSS scores were significantly better in IM olanzapine than in IM levomepromazine. The mean change from baseline on the PANSS positive score was significantly better in both IM olanzapine and IM haloperidol than in IM levomepromazine.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest the possibility that the anti-agitation effects of IM olanzapine and IM levomepromazine are more rapid than those of IM haloperidol. No worsening of EPS was observed. Our results also suggest that compared with IM levomepromazine, IM olanzapine is safer and affords greater improvement in symptoms.

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.

An open-label, randomized, controlled trial of zotepine and risperidone for acutely ill, hospitalized, schizophrenic patients with symptoms of agitation

Acutely ill, schizophrenic patients frequently require management of agitation. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of oral zotepine and risperidone in hospitalized, acutely ill schizophrenic patients with symptoms of agitation.This was a 6-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, flexible dosing study. Thirty-nine patients with schizophrenia (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition) who met the criteria of a Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score of greater than or equal to 60 points, PANSS-excitement component (EC) score of greater than or equal to 14 points, and at least 1 PANSS-EC score of greater than or equal to 4 were randomly assigned to either the zotepine or risperidone group. The primary outcome was a comparison of the change in the PANSS-EC total score from baseline to the end of the study between groups.There was no significant between-group difference in dropout rates (zotepine, 15.8% [3/19]; risperidone, 20.0% [4/20]). The mean (SD) daily dose of zotepine from baseline to study end point ranged from 127.6 (62.3) to 236.8 (74.2) mg/d; the corresponding values for risperidone ranged from 3.3 (1.6) to 4.8 (1.7) mg/d. There were no statistically significant differences in patient characteristics, PANSS total score, and PANSS-EC total score between the zotepine and risperidone groups at baseline. Both groups showed significant reductions in the PANSS-EC total scores (zotepine, -10.1 [4.7], P < 0.001; risperidone, -8.0 [5.3], P < 0.001) and PANSS total scores (zotepine, -34.7 [15.8], P < 0.001; risperidone, -28.6 [14.3], P < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in PANSS-EC total score (P = 0.265) and PANSS total score (P = 0.125) changes from baseline to study end point between the 2 treatment groups. Serum uric acid and prolactin decreased more in the zotepine group than the risperidone group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.018, respectively).Zotepine seemed to be as effective as risperidone in treating hospitalized, acutely ill, schizophrenic patients with agitation, and had the advantages of lowering hyperuricemia and hyperprolactinemia. Double-blind, fixed dose studies with a larger sample size of acutely ill, schizophrenic patients with agitation are needed to confirm the study results.

Length of mechanical restraint following haloperidol injections versus oral atypical antipsychotics for the initial treatment of acute schizophrenia: a propensity-matched analysis from the Japanese diagnosis procedure combination database

Differences in effectiveness between haloperidol injection and oral atypical antipsychotics in the acute-phase treatment of schizophrenia are not well examined. We retrospectively investigated whether these treatment options affected the length of mechanical restraint. We used the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination Database to identify schizophrenia patients who were involuntarily hospitalized and receiving mechanical restraint between July and December, 2006-2009. Data included patient demographics, use of antipsychotics, and number of days on which patients underwent mechanical restraint. Propensity score matching was performed to compare the number of days of mechanical restraint between the haloperidol injection group and the oral atypical antipsychotics group. We used survival analysis to examine whether the initial difference in treatment affected the number of days of mechanical restraint. Cox regression was performed to compare the concurrent effects of various factors. Among 1731 eligible patients, 574 were treated with haloperidol injections and 420 with atypical antipsychotics. Matching produced 274 patients in each group. Cox regression analysis showed that the initial therapeutic agents did not significantly affect the number of days of mechanical restraint. The results indicate that atypical antipsychotics were as effective as haloperidol injections in the acute-phase treatment of schizophrenia.

Pediatric mental health emergencies and special health care needs

Children with mental health problems are increasingly being evaluated and treated by both pediatric primary care and pediatric emergency physicians. This article focuses on the epidemiology, evaluation, and management of the 2 most common pediatric mental health emergencies, suicidal and homicidal/aggressive patients, as well as the equally challenging population of children with autism or other developmental disabilities.

A naturalistic comparison of the efficacy and safety of intramuscular olanzapine and intramuscular levomepromazine in agitated elderly patients with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

There have not been any reports in Japan clarifying the efficacy and safety of intramuscular (IM) olanzapine and IM levomepromazine in agitated elderly patients with schizophrenia. This study was a comparative investigation of the clinical efficacy and safety of IM olanzapine and IM levomepromazine in agitated elderly patients with schizophrenia at 2 hours post-dose.

METHODS

The subjects were 52 inpatients who were diagnosed with schizophrenia according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-IV. Their clinical symptoms were assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Excited Component (PANSS-EC), PANSS, and Agitation Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES), and their safety was assessed using the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS), Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS), Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale (DIEPSS), and glucose test.

RESULTS

The PANSS-EC total score, the ACES score, and the glucose level significantly decreased from baseline in both the IM olanzapine group and the levomepromazine injection group; however, no between-group differences were observed. Mean change from baseline in the PANSS total score, positive score, the BARS score, and the DIEPSS total score was significantly greater in the IM olanzapine injection group compared with the levomepromazine injection group.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that agitated elderly patients rapidly respond to IM olanzapine and IM levomepromazine treatment. Furthermore, these results suggest that IM olanzapine is safer than IM levomepromazine and causes greater improvement in positive symptoms.

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.

The psychopharmacology of agitation: consensus statement of the american association for emergency psychiatry project Beta psychopharmacology workgroup

Agitation is common in the medical and psychiatric emergency department, and appropriate management of agitation is a core competency for emergency clinicians. In this article, the authors review the use of a variety of first-generation antipsychotic drugs, second-generation antipsychotic drugs, and benzodiazepines for treatment of acute agitation, and propose specific guidelines for treatment of agitation associated with a variety of conditions, including acute intoxication, psychiatric illness, delirium, and multiple or idiopathic causes. Pharmacologic treatment of agitation should be based on an assessment of the most likely cause of the agitation. If agitation results from a delirium or other medical condition, clinicians should first attempt to treat the underlying cause instead of simply medicating with antipsychotics or benzodiazepines.

Orally disintegrating olanzapine review: effectiveness, patient preference, adherence, and other properties

Orally disintegrating olanzapine (ODO) is a rapid-dissolving formulation of olanzapine which disintegrates in saliva almost immediately, developed as a convenient and adherence-enhancing alternative to the standard olanzapine-coated tablet (SOT). Clinical studies, which form the basis of this review, have shown ODO and SOT to have similar efficacy and tolerability profiles. However, ODO appears to have a number of advantages over SOT in terms of adherence, patient preference, and reduction in nursing burden. Overall, the existing clinical data suggests that compared to SOT, ODO is not only well-suited for difficult-to-treat, agitated, and/or nonadherent patients but, due to its potential ability to improve adherence and greater patient preference, may also be an appropriate formulation for the majority of patients for which olanzapine is the antipsychotic of choice.

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.

Psychopharmacology of aggression in schizophrenia

The management of aggression in patients with schizophrenia is a complex and challenging clinical dilemma. It also is greatly influenced by prevailing societal and medicolegal considerations regarding the perceived associations between violence and mental illness. This article provides a succinct account of a complex area and offers evidence for available treatments to reduce the occurrence of violent behavior among patients with schizophrenia.