Haloperidol for the management of delirium in adult intensive care unit patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Preventing and treating delirium in clinical settings for older adults

Delirium is a serious consequence of many acute or worsening chronic medical conditions, a side effect of medications, and a precipitant of worsening functional and cognitive status in older adults. It is a syndrome characterized by fluctuations in cognition and impaired attention that develops over a short period of time in response to an underlying medical condition, a substance (prescribed, over the counter, or recreational), or substance withdrawal and can be multi-factorial. We present a narrative review of the literature on nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic approaches to prevention and treatment of delirium with a focus on older adults as a vulnerable population. Older adult patients are most at risk due to decreasing physiologic reserves, with delirium rates of up to 80% in critical care settings. Presentation of delirium can be hyperactive, hypoactive, or mixed, making identification and study challenging as patients with hypoactive delirium are less likely to come to attention in an inpatient or long-term care setting. Studies of delirium focus on prevention and treatment with nonpharmacological or medication interventions, with the preponderance of evidence favoring multi-component nonpharmacological approaches to prevention as the most effective. Though use of antipsychotic medication in delirium is common, existing evidence does not support routine use, showing no clear benefit in clinically significant outcome measures and with evidence of harm in some studies. We therefore suggest that antipsychotics be used to treat agitation, psychosis, and distress associated with delirium at the lowest effective doses and shortest possible duration and not be considered a treatment of delirium itself. Future studies may clarify the use of other agents, such as melatonin and melatonin receptor agonists, alpha-2 receptor agonists, and anti-epileptics.

Haloperidol for the treatment of delirium in critically ill patients: an updated systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Haloperidol is frequently used in critically ill patients with delirium, but evidence for its effects has been sparse and inconclusive. By including recent trials, we updated a systematic review assessing effects of haloperidol on mortality and serious adverse events in critically ill patients with delirium.

METHODS

This is an updated systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised clinical trials investigating haloperidol versus placebo or any comparator in critically ill patients with delirium. We adhered to the Cochrane handbook, the PRISMA guidelines and the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation statements. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and proportion of patients with one or more serious adverse events or reactions (SAEs/SARs). Secondary outcomes were days alive without delirium or coma, delirium severity, cognitive function and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

We included 11 RCTs with 15 comparisons (n = 2200); five were placebo-controlled. The relative risk for mortality with haloperidol versus placebo was 0.89; 96.7% CI 0.77 to 1.03; I2 = 0% (moderate-certainty evidence) and for proportion of patients experiencing SAEs/SARs 0.94; 96.7% CI 0.81 to 1.10; I2 = 18% (low-certainty evidence). We found no difference in days alive without delirium or coma (moderate-certainty evidence). We found sparse data for other secondary outcomes and other comparators than placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Haloperidol may reduce mortality and likely result in little to no change in the occurrence of SAEs/SARs compared with placebo in critically ill patients with delirium. However, the results were not statistically significant and more trial data are needed to provide higher certainty for the effects of haloperidol in these patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42017081133, date of registration 28 November 2017.

Facilitators and Barriers Influencing Antipsychotic Medication Prescribing and Deprescribing Practices in Critically Ill Adult Patients: a Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medications do not alter the incidence or duration of delirium, but these medications are frequently prescribed and continued at transitions of care in critically ill patients when they may no longer be necessary or appropriate.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify and describe relevant domains and constructs that influence antipsychotic medication prescribing and deprescribing practices among physicians, nurses, and pharmacists that care for critically ill adult patients during and following critical illness.

DESIGN

We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with critical care and ward healthcare professionals including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists to understand antipsychotic prescribing and deprescribing practices for critically ill adult patients during and following critical illness.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-one interviews were conducted with 11 physicians, five nurses, and five pharmacists from predominantly academic centres in Alberta, Canada, between July 6 and October 29, 2021.

MAIN MEASURES

We used deductive thematic analysis using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify and describe constructs within relevant domains.

KEY RESULTS

Seven TDF domains were identified as relevant from the analysis: Social/Professional role and identity; Beliefs about capabilities; Reinforcement; Motivations and goals; Memory, attention, and decision processes; Environmental context and resources; and Beliefs about consequences. Participants reported antipsychotic prescribing for multiple indications beyond delirium and agitation including patient and staff safety, sleep management, and environmental factors such as staff availability and workload. Participants identified potential antipsychotic deprescribing strategies to reduce ongoing antipsychotic medication prescriptions for critically ill patients including direct communication tools between prescribers at transitions of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Critical care and ward healthcare professionals report several factors influencing established antipsychotic medication prescribing practices. These factors aim to maintain patient and staff safety to facilitate the provision of care to patients with delirium and agitation limiting adherence to current guideline recommendations.

The efficacy and safety of haloperidol for the treatment of delirium in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Purpose

Delirium is common during critical illness and is associated with poor outcomes. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of haloperidol for the treatment of delirium in critically ill patients.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials enrolling critically ill adult patients to compare haloperidol with placebo were searched from inception through to February 20th, 2023. The primary outcome were delirium-free days and overall mortality, secondary outcomes were length of intensive care unit stay, length of hospital stay, and adverse events.

Results

Nine trials were included in our meta-analysis, with a total of 3,916 critically ill patients. Overall, the pooled analyses showed no significant difference between critically ill patients treated with haloperidol and placebo for the delirium-free days (MD -0.01, 95%CI -0.36 to 0.34, p = 0.95, I2 = 30%), overall mortality (OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.04, p = 0.14, I2 = 0%), length of intensive care unit stay (MD -0.06, 95%CI -0.16 to 0.03, p = 0.19, I2 = 0%), length of hospital stay (MD -0.06, 95%CI -0.61 to 0.49, p = 0.83, I2 = 0%), and adverse events (OR 0.90, 95%CI 0.60 to 1.37, p = 0.63, I2 = 0%).

Conclusion

Among critically ill patients, the use of haloperidol as compared to placebo has no significant effect on delirium-free days, overall mortality, length of intensive care unit and/or hospital stay. Moreover, the use of haloperidol did not increase the risk of adverse events.

A scoping review of perceptions from healthcare professionals on antipsychotic prescribing practices in acute care settings

Background

Antipsychotic medications are frequently prescribed in acute care for clinical indications other than primary psychiatric disorders such as delirium. Unfortunately, they are commonly continued at hospital discharge and at follow-ups thereafter. The objective of this scoping review was to characterize antipsychotic medication prescribing practices, to describe healthcare professional perceptions on antipsychotic prescribing and deprescribing practices, and to report on antipsychotic deprescribing strategies within acute care.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases from inception date to July 3, 2021 for published primary research studies reporting on antipsychotic medication prescribing and deprescribing practices, and perceptions on those practices within acute care. We included all study designs excluding protocols, editorials, opinion pieces, and systematic or scoping reviews. Two reviewers screened and abstracted data independently and in duplicate. The protocol was registered on Open Science Framework prior to data abstraction (10.17605/OSF.IO/W635Z).

Results

Of 4528 studies screened, we included 80 studies. Healthcare professionals across all acute care settings (intensive care, inpatient, emergency department) perceived prescribing haloperidol (n = 36/36, 100%) most frequently, while measured prescribing practices reported common quetiapine prescribing (n = 26/36, 76%). Indications for antipsychotic prescribing were delirium (n = 48/69, 70%) and agitation (n = 20/69, 29%). Quetiapine (n = 18/18, 100%) was most frequently prescribed at hospital discharge. Three studies reported in-hospital antipsychotic deprescribing strategies focused on pharmacist-driven deprescribing authority, handoff tools, and educational sessions.

Conclusions

Perceived antipsychotic prescribing practices differed from measured prescribing practices in acute care settings. Few in-hospital deprescribing strategies were described. Ongoing evaluation of antipsychotic deprescribing strategies are needed to evaluate their efficacy and risk.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08650-7.

Acupuncture Treatment of Delirium in Older Adults Hospitalized in Internal Medicine Departments: An Open-Label Pragmatic Randomized-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Acupuncture seems to improve cognitive function in experimental models and to reduce agitation in dementia. The addition of acupuncture to standard-of-care (SOC) may improve clinical outcomes related to delirium in hospitalized older adults.

METHODS

This pragmatic open-label randomized-controlled trial evaluated 81 older adults hospitalized in an internal medicine ward and diagnosed with delirium. Fifty were randomized to daily acupuncture combined with SOC and 31 to SOC only for up to 1 week. Delirium was diagnosed using Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) tool, and its severity was assessed by the long CAM-Severity (CAM-S) tool. The primary study outcome was delirium resolution evaluated as time-to-first delirium remission (over 7 days) and the number of days spent delirium-free.

RESULTS

Time-to-first delirium remission was shorter in the acupuncture arm as compared to the SOC only arm (p < 0.001). A multivariate Cox regression analysis showed a shorter time-to-first remission of delirium in the acupuncture arm as compared with SOC arm [Hazard Ratio 0.267 (95% CI 0.098-0.726, p = 0.010)]. In the 7 days of evaluation, a significantly higher number of delirium-free days was found in the acupuncture arm compared to the SOC arm (p < 0.001), and CAM-S sum from day 2 to day 7 of evaluation was significantly lower in the acupuncture group compared to the control group (p = 0.002). No adverse safety event was found in the acupuncture group.

CONCLUSION

Acupuncture seems to be safe and effective in the treatment of delirium in older patients hospitalized in internal medicine departments.

Management of Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit

In the intensive care unit, delirium is a major contributor to morbidity and mortality in adult patients. Patients with delirium have been shown to have increased length of stay, decreased functional outcomes, and increased risk for requiring placement at the time of discharge. In addition, decreased cognitive function and dementia have been shown to be long-term complications from delirium. The mainstay of treatment and prevention include therapy- and behavioral-based interventions, including frequent orientation, cognitive stimulation, mobilization, sleep restoration, and providing hearing and visual aids. Refractory delirium may require pharmacologic intervention with antipsychotics or alpha-2 agonists.

The Impact of Nursing Delirium Preventive Interventions in the Intensive Care Unit: A Multicenter Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Rationale Delirium is common in critically ill patients and associated with deleterious outcomes. Non-pharmacologic interventions are recommended in current delirium guidelines, but their effects have not been unequivocally established. Objective To determine the effects of a multicomponent nursing intervention program on delirium in the Intensive Care Unit. Methods Stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial, conducted in Intensive care units of 10 centers. Adult critically ill surgical, medical or trauma patients at high risk to develop delirium were included. A multicomponent nursing intervention program focusing on modifiable risk factors was implemented as standard of care. Primary outcome was the number of delirium-free and coma-free days alive in 28 days after Intensive Care Unit admission. Measurements and main results A total of 1749 patients were included. Time spent per 8 hours shift on interventions was median [IQR] 38 [14-116] in the intervention period and median 32 [13-73] minutes in the control period (p=0.44). Patients in the intervention period had median 23 [4-27] delirium-free and coma-free days alive, compared to median 23 [5-27] days for patients in the control group (mean difference -1.21 days, 95%CI -2.84 to 0.42 days; p=0.15). Also, the number of delirium days was similar: median 2 [1-4] days (ratio of medians 0.90, 95%CI 0.75 to 1.09; p=0.27). Conclusion In this large randomized controlled trial in adult ICU patients, a limited increase was achieved of the use of nursing interventions, and no change in the number of delirium-free and coma-free days alive in 28 days could be determined. Clinical trial registration available at www.clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT03002701.

Perioperative Implications of the 2020 American Heart Association Scientific Statement on Drug-Induced Arrhythmias-A Focused Review

The recently released American Heart Association (AHA) scientific statement on drug-induced arrhythmias discussed medications commonly associated with bradycardia, supraventricular tachycardias, and ventricular arrhythmias. The foundational data for this statement were collected from general outpatient and inpatient populations. Patients undergoing surgical and minimally invasive treatments are a unique subgroup, because they may experience hemodynamic changes associated with anesthesia and their procedure, receive multiple drug combinations not given in either inpatient or outpatient settings, or experience postprocedural inflammatory syndromes. Accordingly, the generalizability of the AHA scientific statement to this perioperative population is unclear. This focused review highlights important aspects of the new AHA scientific statement and their application to the perioperative setting. The authors review medications frequently encountered and given by anesthesiologists and their risk of drug-induced arrhythmias and discuss common anesthetic and adjunctive medications and their associated risks of bradycardia, atrial fibrillation, torsades de pointes, and drug-induced Brugada syndrome. In many instances, the risk of arrhythmia reported by the AHA scientific statement in the general population appeared to be higher than found in perioperative arenas. Furthermore, the authors discuss the arrhythmia risk of additional medications commonly ordered or administered by anesthesiologists that are not included in the AHA scientific statement. As patient and procedural complexity increases and novel anesthetic combinations propagate, further research and observational studies will be required to delineate further perioperative risks for drug-induced arrhythmia.

Cognitive Stimulation in an Intensive Care Unit: A Qualitative Evaluation of Barriers to and Facilitators of Implementation

BACKGROUND

Delirium in the intensive care unit is associated with poor patient outcomes. Recent studies support nonpharmacological therapy, including cognitive stimulation, to address delirium. Understanding barriers to cognitive stimulation implemented by nurses during clinical care is essential to translating evidence into practice.

OBJECTIVE

To use qualitative methods through a structured quality improvement project to understand nurses' perceived barriers to implementing a cognitive stimulation intervention in a medical intensive care unit.

METHODS

Data were collected through semistructured interviews with nurses in a medical intensive care unit. Data were categorized into themes by using thematic analysis and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. During cognitive stimulation, nurses reviewed with patients a workbook of evidence-based tasks (focused on math, alertness, motor skills, visual perception, memory, problem-solving, and language).

RESULTS

The 23 nurses identified 62 barriers to and 26 facilitators of cognitive stimulation. These data were summarized into 12 barrier and 9 facilitator themes corresponding to the following Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains: Intervention Characteristics, Outer Setting, Inner Setting, and Characteristics of Individuals. Nurses also identified several facilitators within the Process domain. Patient-specific variables, including sedation, were the most frequently reported barriers. Other barriers included cognitive stimulation not being prioritized, nursing staff-related issues, documentation burden, and a lack of understanding of, or appreciation for, the evidence supporting cognitive stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of cognitive stimulation requires a multidisciplinary approach to address perceived barriers arising from the organization, context, and individuals associated with the intervention, as well as the intervention itself.

Impact of Delirium and Its Motor Subtypes on Stroke Outcomes

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Delirium is an acute and fluctuating impairment of attention, cognition, and behavior. Although common in stroke, studies that associate the clinical subtypes of delirium with functional outcome and death are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the influence of delirium occurrence and its different motor subtypes over stroke patients' prognosis.

METHODS

Prospective cohort of stroke patients with symptom onset within 72 hours before research admission. Delirium was diagnosed by Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit, and its motor subtypes were defined according to the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale. The main outcome was functional dependence or death (modified Rankin Scale>2) at 90 days comparing: delirium versus no delirium patients; and between motor subtypes. Secondary outcomes included modified Rankin Scale score >2 at 30 days and 90-day-mortality.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-seven patients were enrolled. Delirium occurred in 71 patients (31.3%), with the hypoactive subtype as the most frequent, in 41 subjects (57.8%). Delirium was associated with increased risk of death and functional dependence at 30 and 90 days and higher 90-day mortality. Multivariate analysis showed delirium (odds ratio, 3.28 [95% CI, 1.17-9.22]) as independent predictor of modified Rankin Scale >2 at 90 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Delirium is frequent in stroke patients in the acute phase. Its occurrence-specifically in mixed and hypoactive subtypes-seems to predict worse outcomes in this population. To our knowledge, this is the first study to prospectively investigate differences between delirium motor subtypes over functional outcome three months poststroke. Larger studies are needed to elucidate the relationship between motor subtypes of delirium and functional outcomes in the context of acute stroke.

Virtual reality stimulation to reduce the incidence of delirium in critically ill patients: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Delirium has been long considered as a major contributor to cognitive impairments and increased mortality following a critical illness. Pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic strategies are used against delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU), despite these strategies remaining controversial. Previous studies have shown the feasibility of using virtual reality within the ICU setting, and we propose to use this technology to investigate the effect of immersive virtual reality stimulation on the incidence of delirium in the ICU. Moreover, we propose to use motion sensors to determine if patient movement patterns can lead to early prediction of delirium onset.

METHODS

This study is conducted as a randomized clinical trial. A total of 920 critically ill patients in the ICU will participate. The control group will receive standard ICU care, whereas the intervention group will, in addition to the standard ICU care, receive relaxing 360-degree immersive virtual reality content played inside a head-mounted display with noise-cancelling headphones, three times a day. The first 100 patients, regardless of their group, will additionally have their movement patterns recorded using wearable and ambient sensors. Follow-up measurements will take place 6 months after discharge from the ICU.

DISCUSSION

Delirium is widely present within the ICU setting but lacks validated prevention and treatment strategies. By providing patients with virtual reality stimulation presented inside a head-mounted display and noise-cancelling headphones, participants may be isolated from disturbances on an ICU. It is believed that by doing so, the incidence of delirium will be decrease among these patients. Moreover, identifying movement patterns associated with delirium would allow for early detection and intervention, which may further improve long-term negative outcomes associated with delirium during critical care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04498585 . Registered on August 3, 2020.

Observational study of haloperidol in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Haloperidol, a widely used antipsychotic, has been suggested as potentially useful for patients with COVID-19 on the grounds of its in-vitro antiviral effects against SARS-CoV-2, possibly through sigma-1 receptor antagonist effect.

METHODS

We examined the associations of haloperidol use with intubation or death and time to discharge home among adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) Greater Paris University hospitals. Study baseline was defined as the date of hospital admission. The primary endpoint was a composite of intubation or death and the secondary endpoint was discharge home among survivors in time-to-event analyses. In the primary analyses, we compared these two outcomes between patients receiving and not receiving haloperidol using univariate Cox regression models in matched analytic samples based on patient characteristics and other psychotropic medications. Sensitivity analyses included propensity score analyses with inverse probability weighting and multivariable Cox regression models.

RESULTS

Of 15,121 adult inpatients with a positive COVID-19 PT-PCR test, 39 patients (0.03%) received haloperidol within the first 48 hours of admission. Over a mean follow-up of 13.8 days (SD = 17.9), 2,024 patients (13.4%) had a primary end-point event and 10,179 patients (77.6%) were discharged home at the time of study end on May 1st. The primary endpoint occurred in 9 patients (23.1%) who received haloperidol and 2,015 patients (13.4%) who did not. The secondary endpoint of discharge home occurred in 16 patients (61.5%) who received haloperidol and 9,907 patients (85.8%) who did not. There were no significant associations between haloperidol use and the primary (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.62, p = 0.531) and secondary (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.74 to 2.28, p = 0.355) endpoints. Results were similar in multiple sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Findings from this multicenter observational study suggest that haloperidol use prescribed at a mean dose of 4.5 mg per day (SD = 5.2) for a mean duration of 8.4 days (SD = 7.2) may not be associated with risk of intubation or death, or with time to discharge home, among adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Major publications in the critical care pharmacotherapy literature: 2019

PURPOSE

To summarize selected meta-analyses and trials related to critical care pharmacotherapy published in 2019.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Critical Care Pharmacotherapy Literature Update (CCPLU) Group screened 36 journals monthly for impactful articles and reviewed 113 articles during 2019 according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria.

RESULTS

Articles with a 1A grade, including three clinical practice guidelines, six meta-analyses, and five original research trials are reviewed here from those included in the monthly CCPLU. Clinical practice guidelines on the use of polymyxins and antiarrhythmic drugs in cardiac arrest as well as meta-analyses on antipsychotic use in delirium, stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP), and vasoactive medications in septic shock and cardiac arrest were summarized. Original research trials evaluated delirium, sedation, neuromuscular blockade, SUP, anticoagulation reversal, and hemostasis.

CONCLUSION

This clinical review and expert opinion provides summary and perspectives of clinical practice impact on influential critical care pharmacotherapy publications in 2019.

[Study protocol to improve the quality of delirium management in intensive care]

BACKGROUND

Delirium in cardiac surgery patients is common and is associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation and hospital stay as well as higher mortality. Protocols may improve outcome. In our cardiac surgery intensive care unit (ICU), patients with delirium have not received standardized treatment so far.

HYPOTHESIS

In cardiac surgery ICU patients, standardized delirium management will lead after a 4‑week introduction, compared to nonstandardized treatment, to a reduction of delirium duration.

METHODS

Prospective before/after study to evaluate a quality improvement project for delirium management over 12 weeks including 140 patients.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

(a) ≥18 years, (b) consent for research with their data.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

(a) palliative status, (b) present during both the before/after phase, (c) pregnancy, (d) included in a competitive study, or (e) delirium not assessable. The implementation includes the introduction of a protocol with interprofessional training, bedside-teaching, pocket cards, posters, and reminders. The primary outcome is the duration of delirium, assessed four times a day with validated instruments. Secondary outcome measures include delirium incidence, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay in ICU and hospital, mortality, nursing/therapeutic interventions, cumulative doses of delirium-related drugs, and complications of delirium for a follow-up of 28 days. Empirical data will be analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistics.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study is a reduction of the duration and frequency of delirium in cardiac ICU patients and will provide evidence of the effect size of the introduction of a delirium management.

Internal clock and the surgical ICU patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The alteration of circadian rhythms in the postoperative period has been demonstrated to influence the outcomes. With this narrative review we would revise how anesthesia, surgery and intensive care can interfere with the circadian clock, how this could impact on the postsurgical period and how to limit the disruption of the internal clock.

RECENT FINDINGS

Anesthesia affects the clock in relation to the day-time administration and the type of anesthetics, N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists or gamma-aminobutyric acid receptors agonists. Surgery causes stress and trauma with consequent alteration in the circadian release of cortisol, cytokines and melatonin. ICU represents a further challenge for the patient internal clock because of sedation, immobility, mechanical ventilation and alarms noise.

SUMMARY

The synergic effect of anesthesia, surgery and postoperative intensive care on circadian rhythms require a careful approach to the patient considering a role for therapies and interventions aimed to re-establish the normal circadian rhythms. Over time, approach like the Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium Monitoring and Management, Early Mobility and Family engagement and empowerment bundle can implement the clinical practice.

Can haloperidol prophylaxis reduce the incidence of delirium in critically ill patients in intensive care units? A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of haloperidol in the prevention of delirium in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for eligible randomized controlled trials up to July 2019. No publication type or language restrictions were applied.

RESULTS

Compared to the placebo, haloperidol did not significantly reduce the incidence of delirium in all ICU patients (relative risk (RR), 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.62-1.10, p = 0.20). However, haloperidol prophylaxis could reduce the incidence of delirium exclusively in postoperative patients admitted to an ICU (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.86, p = 0.004). We observed no significant differences between the haloperidol and placebo groups in terms of length of ICU stay, all-cause mortality, and adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of prophylactic haloperidol might reduce the incidence of delirium in postoperative patients admitted to an ICU, but not in all ICU patients.

Haloperidol for the treatment of delirium in critically ill patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

BACKGROUND

Haloperidol is the most frequently used drug to treat delirium in the critically ill patients. Yet, no systematic review has focussed on the effects of haloperidol in critically ill patients with delirium.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of haloperidol vs any intervention on all-cause mortality, serious adverse reactions/events, days alive without delirium, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), cognitive function and delirium severity in critically ill patients with delirium. We also report on QTc prolongation, delirium resolution and extrapyramidal symptoms.

RESULTS

We included 8 RCTs with 11 comparisons (n = 951). We adjudicated one trial as having overall low risk of bias. Three trials used rescue haloperidol; excluding these, we did not find an effect of haloperidol vs control on all-cause mortality (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.33-3.06; I²  = 0%; 112 participants; 3 trials; 4 comparisons; very low certainty) or delirium severity (SMD -0.15; 95% CI -0.61-0.30; I²  = 27%; 134 participants; 3 trials; 4 comparisons; very low certainty). No trials reported adequately on serious adverse reactions/events. Only one trial reported on days alive without delirium, cognitive function and QTc prolongation, and no trials reported on HRQoL. Sensitivity analyses, including trials using rescue haloperidol, did not change the results.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for the use of haloperidol to treat critically ill patients with delirium is sparse, of low quality and inconclusive. We therefore have no certainty regarding any beneficial, harmful or neutral effects of haloperidol in these patients.

Antipsychotics for Treating Delirium in Hospitalized Adults: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Delirium is common in hospitalized patients and is associated with worse outcomes. Antipsychotics are commonly used; however, the associated benefits and harms are unclear.

PURPOSE

To conduct a systematic review evaluating the benefits and harms of antipsychotics to treat delirium in adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsycINFO from inception to July 2019 without language restrictions.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antipsychotic versus placebo or another antipsychotic, and prospective observational studies reporting harms.

DATA EXTRACTION

One reviewer extracted data and assessed strength of evidence (SOE) for critical outcomes, with confirmation by another reviewer. Risk of bias was assessed independently by 2 reviewers.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Across 16 RCTs and 10 observational studies of hospitalized adults, there was no difference in sedation status (low and moderate SOE), delirium duration, hospital length of stay (moderate SOE), or mortality between haloperidol and second-generation antipsychotics versus placebo. There was no difference in delirium severity (moderate SOE) and cognitive functioning (low SOE) for haloperidol versus second-generation antipsychotics, with insufficient or no evidence for antipsychotics versus placebo. For direct comparisons of different second-generation antipsychotics, there was no difference in mortality and insufficient or no evidence for multiple other outcomes. There was little evidence demonstrating neurologic harms associated with short-term use of antipsychotics for treating delirium in adult inpatients, but potentially harmful cardiac effects tended to occur more frequently.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity was present in terms of dose and administration route of antipsychotics, outcomes, and measurement instruments. There was insufficient or no evidence regarding multiple clinically important outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence does not support routine use of haloperidol or second-generation antipsychotics to treat delirium in adult inpatients.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018109552).

Antipsychotics for Preventing Delirium in Hospitalized Adults: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Delirium is an acute disorder marked by impairments in attention and cognition, caused by an underlying medical problem. Antipsychotics are used to prevent delirium, but their benefits and harms are unclear.

PURPOSE

To conduct a systematic review evaluating the benefits and harms of antipsychotics for prevention of delirium in adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsycINFO from inception through July 2019, without restrictions based on study setting, language of publication, or length of follow-up.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) that compared an antipsychotic with placebo or another antipsychotic, and prospective observational studies with a comparison group.

DATA EXTRACTION

One reviewer extracted data and graded the strength of the evidence, and a second reviewer confirmed the data. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 14 RCTs were included. There were no differences in delirium incidence or duration, hospital length of stay (high strength of evidence [SOE]), and mortality between haloperidol and placebo used for delirium prevention. Little to no evidence was found to determine the effect of haloperidol on cognitive function, delirium severity (insufficient SOE), inappropriate continuation, and sedation (insufficient SOE). There is limited evidence that second-generation antipsychotics may lower delirium incidence in the postoperative setting. There is little evidence that short-term use of antipsychotics was associated with neurologic harms. In some of the trials, potentially harmful cardiac effects occurred more frequently with antipsychotic use.

LIMITATIONS

There was significant heterogeneity in antipsychotic dosing, route of antipsychotic administration, assessment of outcomes, and adverse events. There were insufficient or no data available to draw conclusions for many of the outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence does not support routine use of haloperidol or second-generation antipsychotics for prevention of delirium. There is limited evidence that second-generation antipsychotics may lower the incidence of delirium in postoperative patients, but more research is needed. Future trials should use standardized outcome measures.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018109552).

Just a little delirium- A report from the other side

An urine tract infection developed in a serious way with shivering and other signs of septicaemia when the author was planning going skiing. After being admitted to his teaching hospital, the condition got worse with mental confusion. The author thought that he was to be executed due to a new law, giving the relatives of patients who have died during his care, a right to demand his assignation in the most cruel way. This is the thoughts and observations made during the illness.