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

The safety and efficacy of sequential intramuscular/oral ziprasidone treatment of acute episode in patients with schizophrenia: a multicenter, open-labeled study

BACKGROUND

Ziprasidone mesylate injection is an atypical antipsychotic drug which is recently approved in China. In combination with its oral formulation, sequential therapy with ziprasidone brings new interventions to patients with agitation in the acute phase of schizophrenia. The purpose of this 7-day multicenter study conducted in China was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ziprasidone sequential treatment through intramuscular/oral routes in agitated patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

A total of 95 patients were enrolled from three centers in this study. The study duration was 7 days. In the first 3 days, subjects were administered an intramuscular injection of ziprasidone 10-40 mg daily and started sequentially with oral ziprasidone 40-80 mg at dinner (or lunch) from the day of the last intramuscular injection. In the following 4 days, according to the severity of the symptoms and the drug response, 120-160 mg of ziprasidone was orally administered daily. In total, six visits were scheduled to assess the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Behavioral Activity Rating Scale (BARS), the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S), and Improvement (CGI-I) scores throughout the procedure. Lastly, adverse events were recorded during treatment.

RESULTS

Out of the 95 patients that were enrolled, 83 cases were effectively completed. Visits 3, 4, 6, PANSS, and PANSS-excited component (PANSS-EC) subscale points, and Visit 2-Visit 6 viewpoints, BARS scale points, and baseline scores denote a progressive downward trend (P < 0.001). In this study, 62 adverse events were reported. The most common adverse events were extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) (23 cases) and excessive sedation(10 cases), and 13 cases of prolonged QTc interval were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Ziprasidone IM demonstrated significant and rapid reduction in agitation, and sequential oral formulation keep stability and continuation of the treatment can further ensure efficacy. Ziprasidone sequential therapy may provide a new approach to acute agitation in schizophrenic patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Chinese Clinical Trials Registry; URL: https://www.chictr.org.cn : ChiCTR-OIC-16007970.

Managing acute agitation and aggression in the world of drug shortages

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

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

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

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

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

Prescription practices in the treatment of agitation in newly hospitalized Chinese schizophrenia patients: data from a non-interventional naturalistic study

BACKGROUND

Data on the pharmacological management of acute agitation in schizophrenia are scarce. The aim of this study is to investigate the prescription practices in the treatment of agitation in Chinese patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

We conducted a large, multicenter, observational study in 14 psychiatry hospitals in China. Newly hospitalized schizophrenia patients with the PANSS-EC total score ≥ 14 and a value ≥4 on at least one of its five items were included in the study. Their drug treatments of the first 2 weeks in hospital were recorded by the researchers.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and 53 patients enrolled in and 847 (99.30%) completed the study. All participants were prescribed antipsychotics, 40 (4.72%) were prescribed benzodiazepine in conjunction with antipsychotics and 81 were treated with modified electric convulsive therapy (MECT). Four hundred and 12 (48.64%) patients were prescribed only one antipsychotic, in the order of olanzapine (120 patients, 29.13%), followed by risperidone (101 patients, 24.51%) and clozapine (41 patients, 9.95%). About 435 (51.36%) participants received antipsychotic polypharmacy, mostly haloperidol + risperidone (23.45%), haloperidol+ olanzapine (17.01%), olanzapine+ ziprasidone (5.30%), haloperidol + clozapine (4.37%) and haloperidol + quetiapine (3.90%). Binary logistic regression analysis suggests that a high BARS score (OR 2.091, 95%CI 1.140-3.124), severe agitation (OR 1.846, 95%CL 1.266-2.693), unemployment or retirement (OR 1.614, 95%CL 1.189-2.190) and aggressiveness on baseline (OR 1.469, 95%CL 1.032-2.091) were related to an increased antipsychotic polypharmacy odds. Male sex (OR 0.592, 95%CL 0.436-0.803) and schizophrenia in older persons (age ≥ 55 years, OR 0.466, 95%CL 0.240-0.902) were less likely to be associated with antipsychotic polypharmacy.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates that monotherapy and polypharmacy display equally common patterns of antipsychotic usage in managing agitation associated with schizophrenia in China. The extent and behavioral activities of agitation and several other factors were associated with polypharmacy.

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.

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.

Ziprasidone, haloperidol and clonazepam intramuscular administration in the treatment of agitation symptoms in Chinese patients with schizophrenia: A network meta-analysis

Background

Agitation is very common in patients with acute stage schizophrenia, and injection of antipsychotics and clonazepam is widely used. Network meta-analysis of these comparisons among three injection treatments has been seldom reported.

Aim

To compare the efficacy and safety of various injections for agitation symptoms in Chinese patients with schizophrenia.

Methods

Searches were made in PubMed, Embase and Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Library, Wanfang data, CNKI, SinoMed and VIP databases up to 18 February 2018. Standard search strategies were performed by two reviewers according to the Cochrane Review Group. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. STATA was used to perform meta-analysis. The Cochrane Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the strength of evidence.

Results

A total of 15 studies were included in the network meta-analysis. There were 11 studies comparing ziprasidone with haloperidol, and four studies comparing haloperidol with clonazepam. The results showed that ziprasidone is more effective than haloperidol and clonazepam (sucra: 77.2, 72.8 and 0) in the treatment of agitation symptoms. There was the effect size (standardised mean difference (SMD)) in the three groups: haloperidol: SMD=2.278, 95% CI 1.836 to 2.719; ziprasidone: SMD=2.536, 95% CI 2.082 to 2.990; and clonazepam: SMD=1.360, 95% CI 0.127 to 2.593. The acceptability was assessed by the incidence of excessive sedation, which showed that ziprasidone and haloperidol were similar with both being superior to clonazepam (sucra: 0.3, 0.7 and 99.0). Ziprasidone had significantly less adverse effects than haloperidol in effects of extrapyramidal system (EPS) (z=5.01, p<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between haloperidol and ziprasidone in tachycardia and abnormal ECG (z=1.69, p=0.091; z=0.87, p=0.386; respectively). Based on GRADE, the strength of the evidence for primary outcome was ‘medium’.

Conclusion

Our results suggested that ziprasidone was more suitable than haloperidol and clonazepam in the treatment of agitation symptoms in Chinese patients with schizophrenia, according to the efficacy and acceptability of these three intramuscular injection medications.

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.

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

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

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.

'As required' medication regimens for seriously mentally ill people in hospital

BACKGROUND

Drugs used to treat psychotic illnesses may take weeks to be effective. In the interim, additional 'as required' doses of medication can be used to calm patients in psychiatric wards. The practice is widespread, with 20% to 50% of people on acute psychiatric wards receiving at least one 'as required' dose of psychotropic medication during their admission.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of 'as required' medication regimens with regular patterns of medication for the treatment of psychotic symptoms or behavioural disturbance, thought to be secondary to psychotic illness. These regimens may be given alone or in addition to any regular psychotropic medication for the long-term treatment of schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register, which is based on regular searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, PsycINFO and registries of clinical trials, in November 2001, March 2006, July 2012 andOctober 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We aimed to include all relevant randomised controlled trials involving hospital inpatients with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses, comparing any regimen of medication administered for the short-term relief of behavioural disturbance, or psychotic symptoms, to be given at the discretion of ward staff ('as required', 'prn') with fixed non-discretionary patterns of drug administration of the same drug(s). This was in addition to regular psychotropic medication for the long-term treatment of schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses where prescribed.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected abstracts and papers for inclusion. If trials had been found, we would have extracted data from the papers and quality assessed the data. For dichotomous data we would have calculated the risk ratios (RR), with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). We would have conducted analyses on an intention-to-treat basis. If data were available we would have completed a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We have not been able to identify any randomised trials comparing 'as required' medication regimens to regular regimens of the same drug. Our main outcomes of interest were important changes in (i) mental state, (ii) behaviour, (iii) dose of medication used, (iv) adverse events, (v) satisfaction with care and (iv) cost of care.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no evidence from within randomised trials to support this common practice. Current practice is based on clinical experience and habit rather than high quality evidence.

QT Interval Prolongation Associated with Intramuscular Ziprasidone in Chinese Patients: A Case Report and a Comprehensive Literature Review with Meta-Analysis

Intramuscular (IM) ziprasidone has been associated with QTc interval prolongations in patients with preexisting risk factors. A 23-year-old male Chinese schizophrenia patient experienced an increase of QTc interval of 83 milliseconds (ms) after receiving 20 mg IM ziprasidone (baseline and increased QT/QTc were, respectively, 384/418 and 450/501). This was rated as a probable adverse drug reaction (ADR) by the Liverpool ADR causality assessment tool. A systematic review including all types of trials reporting the effect of IM ziprasidone on the QTc interval prolongation identified 19 trials with a total of 1428 patients. Mean QTc change from baseline to end of each study was −3.7 to 12.8 ms after IM ziprasidone. Four randomized trials (3 of 4 published in Chinese) were used to calculate a meta-analysis of QTc interval prolongation which showed no significant differences between IM ziprasidone and IM haloperidol groups (risk ratio 0.49 to 4.31, 95% confidence interval 0.09 to 19.68, P = 0.06 to 0.41). However, our review included two cases of patients who experienced symptoms probably related to QTc prolongation after IM ziprasidone. Thus, careful screening and close monitoring, including baseline ECG, should be considered in patients receiving IM ziprasidone for the first time.