Pharmacological treatment of psychotic agitation

Pharmacological effects and therapeutic potential of natural compounds in neuropsychiatric disorders: An update

Neuropsychiatric diseases are a group of disorders that cause significant morbidity and disability. The symptoms of psychiatric disorders include anxiety, depression, eating disorders, autism spectrum disorders (ASD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and conduct disorder. Various medicinal plants are frequently used as therapeutics in traditional medicine in different parts of the world. Nowadays, using medicinal plants as an alternative medication has been considered due to their biological safety. Despite the wide range of medications, many patients are unable to tolerate the side effects and eventually lose their response. By considering the therapeutic advantages of medicinal plants in the case of side effects, patients may prefer to use them instead of chemical drugs. Today, the use of medicinal plants in traditional medicine is diverse and increasing, and these plants are a precious heritage for humanity. Investigation about traditional medicine continues, and several studies have indicated the basic pharmacology and clinical efficacy of herbal medicine. In this article, we discuss five of the most important and common psychiatric illnesses investigated in various studies along with conventional therapies and their pharmacological therapies. For this comprehensive review, data were obtained from electronic databases such as MedLine/PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, EMBASE, DynaMed Plus, ScienceDirect, and TRIP database. Preclinical pharmacology studies have confirmed that some bioactive compounds may have beneficial therapeutic effects in some common psychiatric disorders. The mechanisms of action of the analyzed biocompounds are presented in detail. The bioactive compounds analyzed in this review are promising phytochemicals for adjuvant and complementary drug candidates in the pharmacotherapy of neuropsychiatric diseases. Although comparative studies have been carefully reviewed in the preclinical pharmacology field, no clinical studies have been found to confirm the efficacy of herbal medicines compared to FDA-approved medicines for the treatment of mental disorders. Therefore, future clinical studies are needed to accelerate the potential use of natural compounds in the management of these diseases.

Rapid tranquilization: new approaches in the emergency treatment of behavioral disturbances

Psychiatric emergencies are often accompanied by behavioral disturbances that interfere with normal assessment and call for immediate intervention. Different pharmacological treatment regimens have been used for this purpose. Most of these regimens are based upon common clinical practice and have limited evidence base. Recently, a major publication by experts in the field of emergency psychiatry has covered this topic and the therapeutic armamentarium has been extended with the atypical antipsychotics. However, research is still hampered by different methodological limitations: unclear definition of the agitated state and therapeutic goal, idiosyncratic measurement, small sample sizes. The perspective of the patient and the interaction between the emergency care setting and treatment regimen also need further attention. All these important, but often neglected issues are covered in a selective review of the literature.

Comparison of Haloperidol, Promethazine, Trifluoperazine, and Chlorpromazine in Terms of Velocity and Durability of the Sedation among Acute Aggressive Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background:

Knowledge and skill about sedation of aggressive patients is necessary for each psychiatrist. The purpose of this study was comparing the velocity and durability of sedation induced by the haloperidol, trifluoperazine, promethazine, and chlorpromazine in aggressive patients.

Materials and Methods:

This randomized clinical trial was done on 76 aggressive patients referred to Psychiatry Emergency Service of Noor Hospital of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences that were randomly divided into four groups of haloperidol, promethazine, chlorpromazine, and trifluoperazine. Patients were evaluated at 30 min intervals for aggressive symptoms, and if they did not respond to intervention after the first 30 min or if they showed aggression again, a same dose of the injected drug was prescribed. The length of sedation time was recorded for each patient.

Results:

Seventy-six patients with the mean age of 31.89 ± 8.73 years were participated and 63.2% of them were male. Response to intervention after the first injection was seen in 40.8% and 59.2% needed the second injection. The mean time needed for obtaining sedation was 17.38 ± 8.23 and 19.66 ± 4.64 min after the first and second injection, respectively. The mean times of sedation induction were not significantly related to age, gender, type of substance used, type of aggression, and type of psychiatric disorder. Considering the type of drugs, there was no significant difference between velocity and durability effect of sedation after the first and second injection.

Conclusion:

Comparing the velocity and durability of sedative effect of the four studied drugs on acute aggressive patients, did not show any significant difference between them.

PLACID study: A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of inhaled loxapine versus intramuscular aripiprazole in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder

The aim of the study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of inhaled loxapine compared with the intramuscular (IM) antipsychotic aripiprazole in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder. PLACID was an assessor-blind, parallel-group trial conducted in 23 centres in the Czech Republic, Germany, Spain, and Russia. Patients (aged 18-65 years) diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder experiencing acute agitation (Clinical Global Impression [CGI]-Severity score ≥ 4) while hospitalized or attending an emergency room were randomized to receive up to two doses of inhaled loxapine 9.1 mg or IM aripiprazole 9.75 mg (≥ 2 h between doses) during the 24-h study period. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to response (CGI-Improvement score 1 [very much improved] or 2 [much improved]). The primary analysis included randomized patients who provided informed consent (full analysis set [FAS]); the safety analysis included all patients who received study medication. The FAS comprised 357 patients (enrolled December 2, 2014 - October 31, 2016). The between-treatment difference in median time to CGI-Improvement response was 10 min (95% CI 0.0-30.0); p = 0.0005) in favour of inhaled loxapine (median [95% CI]: 50 min [30.0-50.0] vs 60 min [50.0-90.0] with IM aripiprazole); the difference was significant at 10 min (responders: 14% [loxapine] vs 4% [aripiprazole]; p = 0.001). There were no safety issues. Inhaled loxapine reduced agitation faster than IM aripiprazole, supporting its use as a first-line option for managing acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

Psychiatric symptoms and synthetic cannabinoid use: Information for clinicians

Background

Limited treatment information is available when patients present with psychotic symptoms secondary to synthetic cannabinoid (SC) use. Symptoms associated with use are often indistinguishable from those encountered with a primary mental illness and also include aggression, confusion, and anxiety. For these patients, clinicians rely on physical presentation, symptom(s) onset, and episode duration when evaluating patients.

Patient History

An adult man was involuntarily admitted to inpatient status secondary to reports of bizarre behaviors that included paranoia and psychomotor agitation. Because of the severity of the symptoms, he was unable to participate in the admission assessment. On day 2, he reported having smoked a substance provided by a friend. In addition, he admitted to previous SC use on 3 occasions, with each occasion resulting in an involuntary admission to inpatient status. The course of this admission was unremarkable.

Conclusions

A brief overview of psychiatric signs and symptoms of SC use and information to help clinicians are included. The presentation of psychotic symptoms secondary to SC may be consistent with those of psychosis or other substances of abuse. Because of the variability in the symptoms produced by SC use, clinicians are encouraged to consider SC use in the diagnostic evaluation.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

DISCUSSION

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

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

Efficacy and Safety of Levosulpiride Versus Haloperidol Injection in Patients With Acute Psychosis: A Randomized Double-Blind Study

BACKGROUND

Injectable antipsychotics are frequently required for controlling agitation and aggression in acute psychosis. No study has examined the use of injectable levosulpiride for this indication.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of injectable levosulpiride and haloperidol in patients with acute psychosis.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study in which 60 drug-naive patients having acute psychosis were randomly assigned to receive either intramuscular haloperidol (10-20 mg/d) or levosulpiride (25-50 mg/d) for 5 days. All patients were rated on Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Overt Agitation Severity Scale (OASS), Overt Aggression Scale-Modified (OAS-M) scores, Simpson Angus Scale (SAS), and Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS).

RESULTS

Repeated-measures ANOVA for BPRS scores showed significant effect of time (P < 0.001) and a trend toward greater reduction in scores in haloperidol group as shown by group × time interaction (P = 0.076). Repeated-measures ANOVA for OASS showed significant effect of time (P < 0.001) but no group × time interaction. Repeated-measures ANOVA for OAS-M scores showed significant effect of time (P < 0.001) and greater reduction in scores in haloperidol group as shown by group × time interaction (P = 0.032). Lorazepam requirement was much lower in haloperidol group as compared with those receiving levosulpiride (P = 0.022). Higher rates of akathisia and extrapyramidal symptoms were noted in the haloperidol group.

CONCLUSIONS

Haloperidol was more effective than levosulpiride injection for psychotic symptoms, aggression, and severity of agitation in acute psychosis, but extrapyramidal adverse effects were less frequent with levosulpiride as compared with those receiving haloperidol.

Unrecognized hypoxia and respiratory depression in emergency department patients sedated for psychomotor agitation: pilot study

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of respiratory depression in patients who are chemically sedated in the emergency department (ED) is not well understood. As the drugs used for chemical restraint are respiratory depressants, improving respiratory monitoring practice in the ED may be warranted. The objective of this study is to describe the incidence of respiratory depression in patients chemically sedated for violent behavior and psychomotor agitation in the ED.

METHODS

Adult patients who met eligibility criteria with psychomotor agitation and violent behavior who were chemically sedated were eligible. SpO2 and ETCO2 (end-tidal CO2) was recorded and saved every 5 seconds. Demographic data, history of drug or alcohol abuse, medical and psychiatric history, HR and BP every 5 minutes, any physician intervention for hypoxia or respiratory depression, or adverse events were also recorded. We defined respiratory depression as an ETCO2 of ≥50 mmHg, a change of 10% above or below baseline, or a loss of waveform for ≥15 seconds. Hypoxia was defined as a SpO2 of ≤93% for ≥15 seconds.

RESULTS

We enrolled 59 patients, and excluded 9 because of ≥35% data loss. Twenty-eight (28/50) patients developed respiratory depression at least once during their chemical restraint (56%, 95% CI 42-69%); the median number of events was 2 (range 1-6). Twenty-one (21/50) patients had at least one hypoxic event during their chemical restraint (42%, 95% CI 29-55%); the median number of events was 2 (range 1-5). Nineteen (19/21) (90%, 95% CI 71-97%) of the patients that developed hypoxia had a corresponding ETCO2 change. Fifteen (15/19) (79%, 95% CI 56-91%) patients who became hypoxic met criteria for respiratory depression before the onset of hypoxia. The sensitivity of ETCO2 to predict the onset of a hypoxic event was 90.48% (95% CI: 68-98%) and specificity 69% (95% CI: 49-84%). Five patients received respiratory interventions from the healthcare team to improve respiration [Airway repositioning: (2), Verbal stimulation: (3)]. Thirty-seven patients had a history of concurrent drug or alcohol abuse and 24 had a concurrent psychiatric history. None of these patients had a major adverse event.

CONCLUSION

About half of the patients in this study exhibited respiratory depression. Many of these patients went on to have a hypoxic event, and most of the incidences of hypoxia were preceded by respiratory depression. Few of these events were recognized by their treating physicians.

A comparison of risperidone and haloperidol for the risk of ischemic stroke in the elderly: a propensity score-matched cohort analysis

OBJECTIVE

With an increase in antipsychotic use in the elderly, the safety profile of antipsychotics has been emphasized. Strong concerns have been raised about whether the risk of ischemic stroke differs between risperidone and haloperidol. This study compared the risk of ischemic stroke between elderly patients taking risperidone and haloperidol.

METHOD

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Korea Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database, applying a propensity-matched analysis. The cohort consisted of elderly patients who were newly prescribed haloperidol or risperidone between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2009. Patients with prior cerebrovascular diseases (ICD-10, I60-I69), transient ischemic attack (ICD-10, G45), or cerebral tumors (ICD-10, C31) during 365 days prior to the initiation date were excluded. The study subjects were selected by propensity score matching. The outcome was defined as the first hospitalization for ischemic stroke (ICD-10, I63). Cox regression models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for ischemic stroke with haloperidol compared with risperidone use.

RESULTS

A total of 14,103 patients were included in the propensity-matched cohort for each drug. Overall, the incidence rate was higher for haloperidol users compared to the risperidone users (6.43 per 1000 person-years vs. 2.88 per 1000 person-years). A substantially increased risk was observed in haloperidol users (adjusted HR = 2.02, 95% CI, 1.12-3.62).

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence showed that haloperidol should be prescribed in the elderly with caution.

A prospective study of high dose sedation for rapid tranquilisation of acute behavioural disturbance in an acute mental health unit

BACKGROUND

Acute behavioural disturbance (ABD) is a common problem in psychiatry and both physical restraint and involuntary parenteral sedation are often required to control patients. Although guidelines are available, clinical practice is often guided by experience and there is little agreement on which drugs should be first-line treatment for rapid tranquilisation. This study aimed to investigate sedation for ABD in an acute mental healthcare unit, including the effectiveness and safety of high dose sedation.

METHODS

A prospective study of parenteral sedation for ABD in mental health patients was conducted from July 2010 to June 2011. Drug administration (type, dose, additional doses), time to sedation, vital signs and adverse effects were recorded. High dose parenteral sedation was defined as greater than the equivalent of 10 mg midazolam, droperidol or haloperidol (alone or in combination), compared to patients receiving 10 mg or less (normal dose). Effective sedation was defined as a fall in the sedation assessment tool score by two or a score of zero or less. Outcomes included frequency of adverse drug effects, time to sedation/tranquilisation and use of additional sedation.

RESULTS

Parenteral sedation was given in 171 cases. A single drug was given in 96 (56%), including droperidol (74), midazolam (19) and haloperidol (3). Effective sedation occurred in 157 patients (92%), and the median time to sedation was 20 min (Range: 5 to 100 min). The median time to sedation for 93 patients receiving high dose sedation was 20 min (5-90 min) compared to 20 min (5-100 min; p = 0.92) for 78 patients receiving normal dose sedation. Adverse effects occurred in 16 patients (9%); hypotension (14), oxygen desaturation (1), hypotension and oxygen desaturation (1). There were more adverse effects in the high dose sedation group compared to the normal dose group [11/93 (12%) vs. 5/78 (6%); p = 0.3]. Additional sedation was given in 9 of 171 patients (5%), seven in the high dose and two in the normal dose groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Large initial doses of sedative drugs were used for ABD in just over half of cases and additional sedation was uncommon. High dose sedation did not result in more rapid or effective sedation but was associated with more adverse effects.

Management of acute agitation in the emergency department

Acutely agitated and combative patients are commonly seen and evaluated by health care providers in the emergency department. Treatment options have evolved significantly in recent years with the advent of intramuscular atypical antipsychotics and an expanded repertoire of patient-friendly oral formulations. Selection of the ideal pharmacologic treatment of an acutely agitated patient strengthens the patient-prescriber relationship and promotes adherence to future therapy. In this article, advantages and disadvantages of various treatment modalities for undifferentiated, psychotic, and nonpsychotic agitation are reviewed, including alternatives to the commonly prescribed haloperidol and lorazepam combination. Atypical antipsychotics may be superior in certain patients, with the added benefit of easier conversion to maintenance therapy. Special consideration is given to the treatment of acutely agitated geriatric patients suffering from delirium and/or dementia. Management of these patients should be guided by etiology and patient characteristics to obtain maximum therapeutic benefit. Although emergency department providers may only see a given patient once, the health care team must have an evidence-based approach to the care that is provided in the emergency department, as it can significantly influence the patient's overall course of treatment in the outpatient setting.

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

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

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Intramuscular Ziprasidone in Healthy Volunteers

Little has been published regarding the pharmacokinetics of the intramuscular (IM) formulation of Ziprasidone. The authors report results from 2 early phase I studies in healthy volunteers: a trial of single 5-, 10-, or 20-mg IM doses of ziprasidone in 24 subjects and an open-label 3-way crossover trial of 5-mg intravenous (IV), 5-mg IM, and 20-mg oral ziprasidone in 12 subjects. Absorption of IM ziprasidone was rapid (Tmax < 1 hour). The IM pharmacokinetic profile was consistent between studies and linear, with dose-related increases in exposure observed. The mean IM elimination t(1/2) was short and approximately 2.5 hours. The mean bioavailability for the 5-mg IM ziprasidone dose was approximately 100%. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate, and no subjects were discontinued from the study. No significant effects on renal function or other laboratory values were noted. These results support the use of IM ziprasidone in treating acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia.

Rapid acute treatment of agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder: a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial with inhaled loxapine

OBJECTIVE

The present study evaluated inhaled loxapine for the acute treatment of agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder.

METHODS

A Phase 3, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group inpatient study was performed at 17 psychiatric research facilities. Agitated patients (N=314) with bipolar I disorder (manic or mixed episodes) were randomized (1:1:1) to inhaled loxapine 5 mg or 10 mg, or inhaled placebo using the Staccato® system. Following baseline assessments, patients received Dose 1 and were evaluated for 24 hours. If required, up to two additional doses of study drug and/or lorazepam rescue medication were given. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) score two hours after Dose 1. The key secondary endpoint was the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement score at two hours after Dose 1. Additional endpoints included the changes from baseline in the PANSS-EC from 10 min through 24 hours after Dose 1. Safety was assessed by adverse events, vital signs, physical examinations, and laboratory tests.

RESULTS

For the primary and key secondary endpoints, both doses of inhaled loxapine significantly reduced agitation compared with placebo. Reduced agitation, as reflected in PANSS-EC score, was evident 10 min after Dose 1 with both doses. Inhaled loxapine was well tolerated, and the most common adverse events were known effects of loxapine or minor oral effects common with inhaled medications (dysgeusia was reported in 17% of patients receiving active drug versus 6% receiving placebo).

CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled loxapine provided a rapid, non-injection, well-tolerated acute treatment for agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder.

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.

Ziprasidone versus olanzapine, risperidone or quetiapine in patients with chronic schizophrenia: a 12-week open-label, multicentre clinical trial

The efficacy, safety and tolerability of ziprasidone versus the comparators olanzapine, risperidone or quetiapine were investigated in adult patients with chronic schizophrenia, schizoaffective and schizophreniform disorders, with lack of efficacy or intolerance to their previous antipsychotic treatment based on clinical judgement of the investigator. A total of 293 patients were randomized to 12 weeks treatment with either ziprasidone 80-160 mg/day (n=147) or with one of the comparator drugs (n=146). In the latter group the investigator could choose between olanzapine 10-20 mg/day (n=24), risperidone 4-8 mg/day (n=22) or quetiapine 300-750 mg/day (n=97). The study comprised four visits including a baseline examination prior to randomization and further examinations at the end of weeks 1, 4 and 12. Ziprasidone was non-inferior (defined as a difference of 7 units or less on the PANSS scale to the disadvantage of ziprasidone) to the composite group (olanzapine, risperidone or quetiapine) on the total PANSS score as well as on all subscores (P<0.0001); there were no significant between-group differences in the CGI-S and I and UKU scores. Ziprasidone-treated patients lost an average of 2.1 kg in the 12 weeks of the study, the mean weight for risperidone and quetiapine remained unchanged, and patients receiving olanzapine gained 3.1 kg on average.

Pharmacokinetics of loxapine following inhalation of a thermally generated aerosol in healthy volunteers

The objective of this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose escalation study was to determine the pharmacokinetic characteristics, safety, and tolerability of single doses of inhaled loxapine aerosol in healthy volunteers. Loxapine was delivered by means of a unique thermally generated aerosol comprising drug particles of a size designed for deep lung delivery and absorption. Fifty participants were randomized to receive 0.625, 1.25, 2.5, 5.0, or 10 mg of loxapine aerosol or placebo. Following inhalation, the t(max) median (25%, 75%) was 2 (1, 3) minutes. The loxapine AUC(infinity) was dose proportional across all doses with slope (90% confidence interval) of log AUC(infinity) versus log dose = 0.909 (0.832, 0.987). No clinically meaningful changes were noted in hematology results, blood chemistry, vital signs, or respiratory function. The most common adverse events were dizziness, somnolence, and bad taste. The inhalation of Staccato loxapine represents a safe, well-tolerated means for rapidly achieving therapeutic plasma concentrations of loxapine.

Conventional intramuscular sedatives versus ziprasidone for severe agitation in adolescents: case-control study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare intramuscular (IM) ziprasidone to conventional IM medications (haloperidol combined with lorazepam) for the treatment of severe agitation in adolescents (age 12-17).

METHODS

We retrospectively identified consecutive severe agitation episodes (defined as requiring physical restraint) in adolescents treated with either IM ziprasidone or conventional IM agents in a psychiatric emergency room. For ziprasidone, the dosage was 20 mg for 23 episodes and 10 mg for 5 episodes. For 24 episodes treated with combined haloperidol and lorazepam, the dosages were 4.8 +/- 0.3 SEM mg and 1.9 +/- 0.4 mg respectively. Outcomes were the duration of restraint and need for adjunctive "rescue" medications within 60 minutes. These outcomes were decided prior to reviewing any records.

RESULTS

No difference was found in restraint duration (ziprasidone, N = 28, 55 +/- 5 minutes; haloperidol with lorazepam N = 24, 65 +/- 7 minutes, P = NS). Use of "rescue" medications did not differ between the two groups. No changes in blood pressure were found, but pulse decreased 8.3 +/- 2.4 for haloperidol with lorazepam and 8.9 +/- 4.24 for ziprasidone (P = NS). No instances of excessive sedation or extra-pyramidal symptoms were documented.

CONCLUSION

In this study, IM ziprasidone appeared effective, well tolerated, and similar in clinical profile to combined conventional IM medications for treating severe agitation in adolescents. Given the reportedly favorable acute side effect profile of parenteral atypical agents, they may provide an alternative to conventional antipsychotics for treating acute agitation in both adult and adolescent populations. Future randomized, controlled studies are needed.

Clinical characteristics of agitated psychotic patients treated with an oral antipsychotics attended in the emergency room setting: NATURA study

Purpose. Prospective observational study to describe the clinical characteristics of patients with acute psychosis and agitation who receive oral psychopharmacological treatment at psychiatric emergency services (PES). Methods. A total of 278 patients with acute psychosis and agitation were admitted to PES and received oral psychopharmacological treatment. Diagnosis at admission, agitation level at entry and discharge, use of mechanical restraints, pharmacological and time to reintervention were prospectively explored. Severity of the disease was evaluated according to the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excitement Component (PANSS-EC), Agitation Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) at admission, before first reintervention (if any) and at discharge from PES. Results. Most prevalent diagnoses were schizophrenia (77%) and bipolar disorder (12.2%). Mean (SD) scores in rating scales at baseline and at discharge were, respectively: PANSS-EC, 20.38(5.3) and 13.04 (5.5); CGI-S, 3.86(1.1) and 2.17(0.9); and ACES, 2.35(0.6) and 3.60(1.1). A total of 21.6% (60/278) of the patients required mechanical restraints and 38.1% (106/278) reintervention. From the emergency room, 20.5% patients went home while 71.2% were transferred to inpatient units. Conclusion. Clinical characteristics of psychotic agitated patients may help in deciding which type of treatment should be used and may be useful for the design of future prospective trials to explore treatment of agitation.

Treatment of agitation and aggression in bipolar mania: efficacy of quetiapine

OBJECTIVE

Agitation and aggression are potentially disruptive and dangerous features of bipolar mania. This analysis evaluated the effects of quetiapine on agitation and aggression in patients with bipolar I mania.

METHODS

Four double-blind, randomized, controlled trials were conducted using similar protocols; 407 patients with bipolar I mania were randomized to quetiapine monotherapy (200-800 mg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks, and 402 patients were randomized to quetiapine (200-800 mg/day) or placebo in combination with lithium (Li) or divalproex (DVP) for 3 or 6 weeks. Measurements of agitation included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Activation subscale, PANSS Supplemental Aggression Risk subscale scores, and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) items relevant to agitation.

RESULTS

Initial reductions in both the PANSS Activation and PANSS Supplemental Aggression Risk subscale scores were noted by Day 4 with quetiapine and placebo. The reduction in PANSS Activation subscale scores was significantly greater with quetiapine monotherapy than placebo first at Day 21 (-3.5 versus -1.4, P<0.001) and also at Day 84 (-4.8 versus -1.2, P<0.001). The improvement in PANSS Supplemental Aggression Risk subscale score was significantly greater with quetiapine monotherapy than placebo by Day 14 (P<0.01) and all time points thereafter including Day 21 (-4.0 versus -1.8, P<0.001) and Day 84 (-5.6 versus -1.7, P<0.001). In combination therapy, the mean improvement in PANSS Activation subscale score at Day 21 was numerically but not significantly different with QTP+Li/DVP than PBO+Li/DVP (-4.2 versus -3.2, P=0.087). The mean PANSS Supplemental Aggression Risk subscale scores were significantly improved at Day 21 with QTP+Li/DVP versus PBO+Li/DVP (-5.05 versus -3.69, P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Quetiapine is an effective and appropriate treatment choice in managing agitation and aggression associated with bipolar mania.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of ziprasidone versus haloperidol in sequential intramuscular/oral treatment of exacerbation of schizophrenia: economic subanalysis of the ZIMO trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the cost effectiveness of ziprasidone versus haloperidol in sequential intramuscular (IM)/oral treatment of patients with exacerbation of schizophrenia in Spain.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis from the hospital perspective was performed. Length of stay, study medication and use of concomitant drugs were calculated using data from the ZIMO trial. The effectiveness of treatment was determined by the percentage of responders (reduction in baseline Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [BPRS] negative symptoms subscale >or=30%). Economic assessment included estimation of mean (95% CI) total costs, cost per responder and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per additional responder. The economic uncertainty level was controlled by resampling and calculation of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

A total of 325 patients (ziprasidone n = 255, haloperidol n = 70) were included in this economic subanalysis. Ziprasidone showed a significantly higher responder rate compared with haloperidol (71% vs 56%, respectively; p = 0.023). Mean total costs were euro3582 (95% CI 3226, 3937) for ziprasidone and euro2953 (95% CI 2471, 3436) for haloperidol (p = 0.039), mainly due to a higher ziprasidone acquisition cost. However, costs per responder were lower with ziprasidone (euro5045 [95% CI 4211, 6020]) than with haloperidol (euro5302 [95% CI 3666, 7791], with a cost per additional responder (ICER) for ziprasidone of euro4095 (95% CI -130, 22 231). The acceptability curve showed an ICER cut-off value of euro13 891 at the 95% cost-effectiveness probability level for >or=30% reduction in BPRS negative symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with haloperidol, ziprasidone was significantly better at controlling psychotic negative symptoms in acute psychoses. The extra cost of ziprasidone was offset by a higher effectiveness rate, yielding a lower cost per responder. In light of the social benefit (less family burden and greater restoration of productivity), the incremental cost per additional responder with sequential IM/oral ziprasidone should be considered cost effective in patients with exacerbation of schizophrenia in Spain.

Herbal medicines in the treatment of psychiatric disorders: a systematic review

This paper reports a critical review of 27 herbal medicines and formulas in treating a broad range of psychiatric disorders (in addition to anxiety and depression), including obsessive-compulsive, seasonal affective, bipolar depressive, psychotic, phobic and somatoform disorders. Ovid Medline, Pubmed and the Cochrane Library were searched for pharmacological and clinical evidence of herbal medicines with psychotropic activity. A forward search of later citations was also conducted. Whilst substantial high-quality evidence exists for the use of kava and St John's wort in the treatment of anxiety and depression respectively, currently there is insufficient robust clinical evidence for the use of many other herbal medicines in psychiatric disorders. Phytotherapies which potentially have significant use in psychiatry, and urgently require more research are Rhodiola rosea (roseroot) and Crocus sativus (saffron) for depression; Passiflora incarnata (passionflower), Scutellaria lateriflora (scullcap) and Zizyphus jujuba (sour date) for anxiety disorders; and Piper methysticum (kava) for phobic, panic and obsessive-compulsive disorders. While depression and anxiety are commonly researched, the efficacy of herbal medicines in other mental disorders requires attention. The review addresses current issues in herbal psychotherapy: herbal safety, future areas of application, the relationship of herbal medicine with pharmaceuticals and the potential prescriptive integration of phytomedicines with synthetic psychotropic medicines. Particular attention is given to clinical and safety issues with St John's wort and kava.

Intramuscular aripiprazole in the control of agitation

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Delirium in Older Adults With Cancer: Implications for Practice and Research

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive review of the literature and existing evidence-based findings on delirium in older adults with cancer.

DATA SOURCES

Published articles, guidelines, and textbooks.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Although delirium generally is recognized as a common geriatric syndrome, a paucity of empirical evidence exists to guide early recognition and treatment of this sequelae of cancer and its treatment in older adults. Delirium probably is more prevalent than citations note because the phenomenon is under-recognized in clinical practice across varied settings of cancer care.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensive research is needed to formulate clinical guidelines to manage delirium. A focus on delirium in acute care and at the end of life precludes identification of this symptom in ambulatory care, where most cancer therapies are used. Particular emphasis should address the early recognition of prodromal signs of delirium to reduce symptom severity.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Ongoing assessment opportunities and close proximity to patients' treatment experiences foster oncology nurses' mastery of this common exemplar of altered cognition in older adults with cancer. Increasing awareness of and knowledge delineating characteristics of delirium in older patients with cancer can promote early recognition, optimum treatment, and minimization of untoward consequences associated with the historically ignored example of symptom distress.

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

INTRODUCTION

This double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigated the efficacy and safety of intramuscular (IM) aripiprazole and IM haloperidol for the treatment of acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four-hundred and forty-eight patients were randomized (2:2:1 ratio) to IM aripiprazole 9.75 mg, IM haloperidol 6.5 mg, or IM placebo. Patients could receive up to three injections over the first 24 h, with second and third injections administered > or =2 and > or =4 h, respectively, after the first if deemed clinically necessary. Primary efficacy measure was mean change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Excited Component (PEC) score from baseline to 2 h.

RESULTS

Mean improvement in PEC at 2 h was significantly greater for IM aripiprazole (-7.27) vs placebo (-4.78; p<0.001); IM aripiprazole was noninferior to IM haloperidol (-7.75) on PEC. All secondary efficacy measures showed significantly greater improvements at 2 h for IM aripiprazole and IM haloperidol over placebo. Mean number of injections/patient and percentage of patients requiring benzodiazepines were significantly lower for IM aripiprazole vs placebo (p<0.01). IM aripiprazole was well tolerated. Extrapyramidal symptom-related adverse events were similar for aripiprazole (1.7%) and placebo (2.3%) and lower than with haloperidol (12.6%).

CONCLUSION

These results show that IM aripiprazole is an effective treatment, comparable to IM haloperidol, and well-tolerated for acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia.

Orally versus intramuscularly administered antipsychotic drugs in psychiatric emergencies

High utilization of emergency services by patients at increased risk for agitation and aggression makes the determination of effective therapy a major concern of psychiatric care. Agitated and aggressive behavior needs to be treated rapidly and effectively to minimize the risk to both patients and staff. Traditionally, short-acting intramuscular (IM) formulations of conventional antipsychotic drugs have been preferred in the emergency setting due to their rapid onset of action and the ability to administer them to uncooperative patients. IM injections, however, may not always be the preferred option. Recently, orally administered second generation (atypical) antipsychotics have been shown to be at least as effective in managing acute agitation as conventional antipsychotic drugs, with a superior tolerability profile. The current review evaluates pharmacokinetic parameters, formulation options, and clinical efficacy data for the treatment of acute agitation or aggressive behavior with antipsychotic medications. A synthesis of data from individual clinical trials, meta-analyses, review articles, and expert consensus recommendations is used to develop a working clinical algorithm for the acute management of aggression and agitation.

Emergency management of agitation in schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is a common psychiatric condition, affecting approximately 1% of the population. Acute emergent presentations often include hallucinations, delusions, thought, and speech disorders. Agitation is common among emergency patients with schizophrenia. Decisional capacity should be assessed in all patients. Reversible causes of agitation should be ruled out, including infection, metabolic disorders, endocrine disorders, trauma, pain, noncompliance, toxicological disorders, and structural brain abnormalities. Agitation may be managed acutely using a combination of pharmacological agents and nonpharmacological interventions. Effective pharmacological agents include several classes of antipsychotic agents and benzodiazepines. Potential life-threatening complications of pharmacological therapy should be anticipated, which may include neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS), prolonged QT syndrome, and respiratory depression. Nonpharmacological interventions may include a quiet environment, physical restraints, and behavioral interventions. Disposition decisions should be made based on the etiology of agitation, effective management, decisional capacity, and presence of suicidal or homicidal intentions. Many patients who have required nonpharmacological or pharmacological management of agitation require inpatient psychiatric treatment, either voluntarily or involuntarily. Psychiatric consultation should be sought for patients with schizophrenia and uncertain disposition determinations, or those requiring other complex management decisions.

A post hoc analysis of transitioning to oral treatment with olanzapine or haloperidol after 24-hour intramuscular treatment in acutely agitated adult patients with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia might require treatment with IM antipsychotics, followed by a transition to oral medication.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between 24-hour IM and transitional oral dosages of 2 antipsychotic medications, olanzapine and haloperidol.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis used data from a multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study comparing the efficacy of olanzapine, haloperidol, and placebo in acutely agitated inpatients aged > or =18 years with schizophrenia conducted at hospitals in 13 countries. Patients received 1 to 3 IM injections of olanzapine 10 mg or haloperidol 7.5 mg over 24 hours (IM phase), followed by 4 days of oral treatment with 5 to 20 mg/d of either antipsychotic (oral phase). Study patients were grouped according to which drug they received, and subgrouped based on whether they received a single or multiple IM injections. Rates of transition to lower (5-10 mg/d) versus higher (15-20 mg/d) dosages were compared within and between treatments.

RESULTS

Data from 236 patients were analyzed (olanzapine, 121 patients [76 men, 45 women; mean (SD) age, 38.4 (12.2) years; mean (SD) weight, 74.9 (18.5) kg]; haloperidol, 115 patients [80 men, 35 women; mean (SD) age, 38.0 (10.2) years; mean (SD) weight, 75.4 (18.7) kg]). At the end of the IM phase, the rate of haloperidol patients who were transitioned to lower oral doses was significantly higher in the single-injection subgroup compared with the multiple-injection subgroup (P = 0.03); this difference was not found in the group receiving olanzapine. At day 4 of oral treatment, the rates of patients in the olanzapine and haloperidol groups who were transitioned to higher oral doses were significantly higher in the single-injection subgroups compared with the multiple-injection subgroups (P = 0.002 and =0.003, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In this study, the proportion of agitated patients with schizophrenia who transitioned to higher dosages (15-20 mg) of olanzapine or haloperidol by day 4 of the oral switch was significantly greater in patients who were previously treated with a single IM injection of olanzapine (10 mg) or haloperidol (7.5 mg).right.

Ziprasidone for agitation or psychosis in dementia: four cases

OBJECTIVE

These case reports examine the potential efficacy and safety of ziprasidone for the treatment of agitation or psychosis in dementia.

METHOD

The authors performed a retrospective chart review of three patients with DSM-IV diagnoses of dementia, treated with ziprasidone for agitation/psychosis on an academic psychiatric inpatient unit in 2002-2003. In addition, these three case reports are supplemented by a clinical report of the first outpatient with DSM-IV diagnosis of dementia completing a prospective open-label six-week study in 2004 evaluating the use of oral ziprasidone for agitation/psychosis in dementia. Qualitative descriptions of clinical improvement provide outcome data for these case reports.

RESULTS

Four patients with dementia with agitation/psychosis experienced marked behavioral improvement after receiving oral doses of ziprasidone (20-160 mg/day), without any evidence of problematic cardiac or other side-effects. Two of the four patients had final EKGs and both of these patients demonstrated no change of QTc interval after administration of ziprasidone.

CONCLUSIONS

These case reports suggest that oral ziprasidone may be an effective and safe medication for the treatment of agitation or psychosis in patients with dementia.

Management of the acutely violent patient

Violence in the work place is a new but growing problem for our profession. It is likely that at some point a psychiatrist will be confronted with a potentially violent patient or need to assess a violent patient. Understanding predictors and associated factors in violence as well as having a clear and well-defined strategy in approaching and dealing with the violent patient, thus, are crucial. Ensuring patient, staff, and personal safety is the most important aspect in the management of a violent patient. All of the staff must be familiar with management strategies and clear guidelines that are implemented and followed when confronted with a violent patient. The more structured the approach to the violent patient, the less likely a bad outcome will occur. Manipulating one's work environment to maximize safety and understanding how to de-escalate potentially mounting violence are two steps in the approach to the violent patient. Restraint, seclusion, and psychopharmacologic interventions also are important and often are necessary components to the management of the violent patient.

Rapid-acting IM ziprasidone in a psychiatric emergency service: a naturalistic study

Atypical antipsychotics have gained acceptance as first-line treatment for psychotic disorders. Rapid-acting intramuscular (IM) atypicals may supplant benzodiazepine and/or neuroleptic alternatives. IM atypical ziprasidone studies excluded severe psychiatric agitation (PSYCH), or that due to the abuse of alcohol (ETOH) or other substances (SUBS). We report Behavioral Activity Rating Scale agitation scores (range, 1-7) and duration of physical restraints in a naturalistic study in a psychiatric emergency service using IM ziprasidone 20 mg and various doses for conventional antipsychotics. Baseline scores were high for PSYCH, ETOH and SUBS patients (mean, 6.5, 6.9 and 6.6, respectively). Agitation decreased rapidly from baseline with ziprasidone [mean, 5.6, 5.3 and 5.8, respectively, at 15 min (P<.05 for all), and 4.2, 4.1 and 4.1, respectively, at 30 min (P<.01 for all)]. At 2 h, scores were 2.6, 2.1 and 2.3 (P<.01 for all versus baseline). For 9 patients receiving conventional IM antipsychotics, scores were 6.6 (baseline), 5.7 (15 min), 4.2 (30 min) and 2.9 (2 h) (P<.02 versus ziprasidone). Compared with restraint durations from 80 patients receiving conventional IM agents 1 month prior to this study, restraint duration decreased from 91+/-4 to 54+/-3 min with ziprasidone (n=77; P<.01) and varied with conventional IM agents (mean, 60+/-12 min; n=4; P=NS). None of the 19 ziprasidone patients who received electrocardiograms showed prolonged QTc; one had a dystonic reaction. IM ziprasidone appears effective for severe agitation, including agitation associated with alcohol or substance intoxication, and may reduce time in restraints.

Intramuscular Olanzapine in the Management of Acute Agitation

OBJECTIVE

To review the current efficacy and safety evidence for the use of intramuscular olanzapine in the management of acute agitation.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed (all to March 2004) were searched for full-text, English-language publications in humans. Search terms included olanzapine, psychosis, agitation, psychiatric emergency, and intramuscular.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Prospective, randomized, controlled trials that evaluated efficacy or safety endpoints of intramuscular olanzapine in the management of acute agitation were included. All studies were evaluated independently by both authors. For clinical outcomes (efficacy, safety), the definitions as specified by each study were used.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Four prospective trials were included in this review. Intramuscular olanzapine is comparable to haloperidol or lorazepam monotherapy in managing acute agitation associated with schizophrenia and dementia. Intramuscular olanzapine is superior to lorazepam monotherapy in the management of agitation associated with bipolar affective disorder. Preliminary evidence demonstrates that intramuscular olanzapine is associated with fewer adverse movement disorders than monotherapy with intramuscular haloperidol. Interpretation of published evidence is limited by confounding factors of comparator regimens and the patient populations studied.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional studies comparing intramuscular olanzapine with combination antipsychotic/benzodiazepine therapy in more severely ill patients and patients with concomitant medical illnesses are needed to determine the most effective dosing regimen, use of adjunctive medications, and to obtain a comprehensive safety profile.

Oral risperidone plus oral lorazepam versus standard care with intramuscular conventional neuroleptics in the initial phase of treating individuals with acute psychosis

Although atypical antipsychotics are now considered first line treatments for schizophrenia, intramuscular (i.m.) conventional neuroleptics are often still considered necessary in emergency treatment of acute psychoses. This European, multicentre, open-label, active-controlled trial compared oral risperidone plus oral lorazepam to standard care with i.m. conventional neuroleptics with or without lorazepam in the emergency treatment of acutely psychotic patients. Patients were allowed to choose either oral risperidone (a single dose of 2 mg and 2.0-2.5 mg lorazepam; 121 patients) or standard i.m. treatment (conventional neuroleptic with or without lorazepam; 105 patients). No additional treatment was allowed for 2 h. Primary outcome was the percentage of patients with treatment success (asleep or at least much improved on Clinical Global Impression-global improvement scale) 2 h after treatment initiation. Baseline characteristics were similar in both treatment groups. Oral risperidone plus oral lorazepam was more successful at 2 h (66.9%) and significantly non-inferior compared to standard i.m. care (54.3%; P=0.0003), and the incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) was lower (1.7%) compared to standard i.m. care (9.5%). In acutely psychotic patients requiring emergency treatment, oral risperidone/oral lorazepam was at least as effective as i.m. conventional neuroleptic treatment with or without lorazepam. Oral risperidone plus lorazepam rapidly reduces symptoms, including aggression, and causes fewer EPS.

Efficacy of accelerated dose titration of olanzapine with adjunctive lorazepam to treat acute agitation in schizophrenia

We conducted a prospective double-blind study of accelerated dose titration of olanzapine in the treatment of newly admitted acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia. Patients were randomized to either oral olanzapine (10 mg per day) or oral haloperidol (10 mg per day), plus lorazepam as needed (up to 12 mg per day). Antipsychotic dosage was increased to 20 mg per day as early as day 3. Patients were evaluated with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Agitation subscale during the first 24 hours of treatment, daily for the first week, then weekly until study completion. Significant within-group improvement was demonstrated in PANSS Agitation scores for both groups as early as 1 hour after initiating therapy (-5.79 +/- 6.30 for olanzapine and -4.89 +/- 6.05 for haloperidol, P <.001). This study demonstrated that accelerated dose titration of oral olanzapine is as efficacious as oral haloperidol in reducing acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia.

Management of the violent patient

Emergency medical services (EMS) providers must often manage violent or combative patients. The data regarding violence against EMS personnel are poor, but according to studies conducted thus far, between 0.8% and 5.0% of incidents to which EMS personnel respond involve violence or the threat of violence. Physical or chemical restraint is usually the only option available to emergency care providers to control violent patients. Physical restraint, however, can lead to sudden death in otherwise healthy patients, possibly as a result of positional asphyxia, severe acidosis, or a patient's excited delirium. Chemical restraint has traditionally consisted of either neuroleptics or benzodiazepines, but those drugs also have drawbacks. Haloperidol and droperidol, the neuroleptics most frequently used for restraint, can cause serious side effects such as extrapyramidal symptoms or QTc (QT interval corrected for heart rate) prolongation. The Food and Drug Administration recently issued a black box warning regarding the use of droperidol, because the QTc prolongation associated with the drug has led to fatal torsades de pointes in some patients. Benzodiazepines are also associated with adverse effects, such as sedation and respiratory depression, especially when the drugs are mixed with alcohol. The atypical antipsychotics, a new option that may be available soon, are less likely to cause such effects and therefore may be preferred over the neuroleptics. Liquid and injectable formulations of various atypical antipsychotics are currently in clinical trials. Because few options are currently available to EMS personnel for managing violent patients outside of the hospital, more research regarding violence against emergency care providers is necessary.

The controversy over "chemical restraint" in acute care psychiatry

In many healthcare settings, medications are considered a less invasive alternative to the use of physical restraint for agitated patients experiencing a behavioral crisis, a practice that is often referred to as "chemical restraint." However, recent federal regulations appear to equate chemical and physical restraint and to characterize both as extraordinary practices that should not be undertaken lightly. Although many clinicians consider the term "chemical restraint" pejorative, since it does not reflect the possibility that forced medication may be clinically necessary and have a beneficial effect, the term is embedded in recent regulatory language. The author first reviews the controversy over the concept of chemical restraint as it has developed in the mental health literature and regulatory policy. As yet there is no consensus among clinicians or policy makers whether such use of medications is a form of coercion or a form of patient-focused intensive care. The author then discusses precipitants of emergency care and clinical factors and situations that may lead to the use of medications in a way that might be considered chemical restraint. Such factors include clinical and demographic characteristics of patients, institutional characteristics, and staff perception and attitudes. In the final section of the article, the author reviews the recommendations concerning the emergency use of medications given in the Expert Consensus Guidelines on the Treatment of Behavioral Emergencies and discusses treatment developments that have occurred since the time of the survey on which those guidelines were based.