A pilot, open-label safety study of quetiapine for treatment of moderate psychotic agitation in the emergency setting

Psychopharmacology of agitation in acute psychotic and manic episodes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

The agitated older adult in the emergency department: a narrative review of common causes and management strategies

Agitation and aggression are common in older emergency department (ED) patients, can impede the expedient diagnosis of potentially life-threatening conditions, and can adversely impact ED functioning and efficiency. Agitation and aggression in older adults may be due to multiple causes, but chief among them are primary psychiatric disorders, substance use, hyperactive delirium, and symptoms of dementia. Understanding the etiology of agitation in an older adult is critical to proper management. Effective non-pharmacologic modalities are available for the management of mild to moderate agitation and aggression in patients with dementia. Pharmacologic management is indicated for agitation related to a psychiatric condition, severe agitation where a patient is at risk to harm self or others, and to facilitate time-sensitive diagnostic imaging, procedures, and treatment. Emergency physicians have several pharmacologic agents at their disposal, including opioid and non-opioid analgesics, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, ketamine, and combination agents. Emergency physicians should be familiar with geriatric-specific dosing, contraindications, and common adverse effects of these agents. This review article discusses the common causes and non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic management of agitation in older adults, with a specific focus on dementia, delirium, and pain.

Management of Violence and Aggression in Emergency Environment; a Narrative Review of 200 Related Articles

Context:

The aim of this study is to reviewing various approaches for dealing with agitated patients in emergency department (ED) including of chemical and physical restraint methods.

Evidence acquisition:

This review was conducted by searching “Violence,” “Aggression,” and “workplace violence” keywords in these databases: PubMed, Scopus, EmBase, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar. In addition to using keywords for finding the papers, the related article capability was used to find more papers. From the found papers, published papers from 2005 to 2018 were chosen to enter the paper pool for further review.

Results:

Ultimately, 200 papers were used in this paper to conduct a comprehensive review regarding violence management in ED. The results were categorized as prevention, verbal methods, pharmacological interventions and physical restraint.

Conclusion:

In this study various methods of chemical and physical restraint methods were reviewed so an emergency medicine physician be aware of various available choices in different clinical situations for agitated patients.

Management of acute agitation in psychosis: an evidence-based approach in the USA

Agitation in psychiatric settings, particularly in psychosis, presents a staggering challenge for clinicians, who must both manage the patient's acute symptoms and simultaneously make an accurate diagnosis. Too often, the management of the former confounds the latter. Patients are very often sedated medically, which masks their underlying condition, rendering accurate diagnosis delayed and inherently difficult. Significant data are available regarding both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for agitation that maximise symptom control while minimising confounding side-effects. In this article, a review of the historical evolution of agitation management in psychotic illness is presented, followed by an evidence-based clinical guideline for managing agitation in psychosis in the USA.

Antipsychotic Selection for Acute Agitation and Time to Repeat Use in a Psychiatric Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Early recognition and treatment of agitated patients is essential to avoid violence in the psychiatric emergency department (ED). Antipsychotics have established efficacy in managing agitation, yet little is known about how the choice of initial antipsychotic impacts time to repeat use and length of stay (LOS) in the psychiatric ED.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the impact of initial antipsychotic selection on time to repeat use and LOS in the psychiatric ED.

METHODS

A chart review identified 388 cases in which patients were administered an antipsychotic for agitation in the psychiatric ED between July 1 and August 31, 2014. Time to repeat use and LOS were compared for intramuscular (IM) haloperidol, other IM antipsychotics, and oral second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) using the Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test.

RESULTS

Of the 388 cases, 31% (n=122) required repeat medications. Mean time to repeat use for IM haloperidol was 20.1±18.4 hours, which was not significantly different from mean time to repeat use in the groups receiving other IM antipsychotics or oral SGAs (P=0.35). The mean LOS was 29.7±28.7 hours for IM haloperidol, 30.3±36.9 hours for other IM antipsychotics, and 22.6±28.0 hours for oral SGAs. Significant differences in LOS between repeat and nonrepeat users of IM haloperidol and other IM antipsychotics were observed, but not among those who received oral SGAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Mean time to repeat use ranged from 14 to 20 hours with IM haloperidol, other IM antipsychotics, and oral SGAs without significant differences in time to repeat use in the 3 different groups. Repeat users of IM antipsychotics had a significantly longer LOS in the ED compared with nonrepeat users of IM antipsychotics. However, patients who were initially administered oral SGAs did not have longer LOS in the ED even if a repeat dose was given.

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.

Validation of the Excited Component of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS-EC) in a naturalistic sample of 278 patients with acute psychosis and agitation in a psychiatric emergency room

Background

Despite the wide use of the Excited Component of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS-EC) in a clinical setting to assess agitated patients, a validation study to evaluate its psychometric properties was missing.

Methods

Data from the observational NATURA study were used. This research describes trends in the use of treatments in patients with acute psychotic episodes and agitation seen in emergency departments. Exploratory principal component factor analysis was performed. Spearman's correlation and regression analyses (linear regression model) as well as equipercentile linking of Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S), Agitation and Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES) and PANSS-EC items were conducted to examine the scale's diagnostic validity. Furthermore, reliability (Cronbach's alpha) and responsiveness were evaluated.

Results

Factor analysis resulted in one factor being retained according to eigenvalue ≥1. At admission, the PANSS-EC and CGI-S were found to be linearly related, with an average increase of 3.4 points (p < 0.001) on the PANSS-EC for each additional CGI-S point. The PANSS-EC and ACES were found to be linearly and inversely related, with an average decrease of 5.5 points (p < 0.001) on the PANSS-EC for each additional point. The equipercentile method shows the poor sensitivity of the ACES scale. Cronbach's alpha was 0.86 and effect size was 1.44.

Conclusions

The factorial analyses confirm the unifactorial structure of the PANSS-EC subscale. The PANSS-EC showed a strong linear correlation with rating scales such as CGI-S and ACES. PANSS-EC has also shown an excellent capacity to detect real changes in agitated patients.

Evaluation of the use of the positive and negative syndrome scale-excited component as a criterion for administration of p.r.n. medication

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the use of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) to evaluate control of agitation and aggression in inpatients with schizophrenia as a criterion for administration of p.r.n. (as needed) medication.

METHODS

Information was collected retrospectively from clinical records of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia who were admitted to Nakhonsawan Rajanakarindra Psychiatric Hospital, Nakhonsawan, Thailand 1) prior to the adoption of the PANSS-EC, when the decision to administer p.r.n. medication for agitation was based solely on individual judgment, and 2) during the period when the PANSS-EC was used during the first 3 days of admission and its scores were considered as one factor in the decision to administer p.r.n. medication.

RESULTS

The 35 patients in the group who did not receive PANSSEC assessment and the 41 patients in the group who were assessed with the PANSS-EC showed no statistically significant difference in mean number of doses of p.r.n. medication administered for agitation. However, 55.4% of all p.r.n. doses administered in the group assessed with the PANSS-EC were given during the first 3-day period (when the PANSS-EC was used), compared with 37.0% of the p.r.n. doses being administered during the first 3 days in the group not assessed with the PANSS-EC (p = 0.054). The mean number of episodes of aggression during the period of hospitalization was significantly lower in the group assessed with the PANSS-EC (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Including the score on the PANSS-EC in the criteria used to decide whether to administer p.r.n. psychotropic medication to agitated patients with schizophrenia had an impact on staff decision-making and resulted in a more favorable clinical outcome. Further investigation is warranted to test these findings.

Validation of a Clinical Global Impression Scale for Aggression (CGI-A) in a sample of 558 psychiatric patients

OBJECTIVE

Clinical management of aggression depends on the availability of easily administrable measurements allowing reliable evaluation. The present study's aim is to validate a Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Aggression scale (CGI-A).

METHOD

558 inpatients with psychiatric disorders and an agitated-aggressive syndrome at baseline were continuously assessed over 5 days using CGI-A and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC). Equipercentile linking, correlation analyses and linear regression were applied.

RESULTS

Relationship between CGI-A and PANSS-EC total score was found to be linear. On a 5-level CGI-A scale, values of 1 to 5 points were found to correspond to PANSS-EC scores of 12.2, 16.7, 21.3, 25.8, and 30.4, respectively (average increase: 4.6). All findings remained stable when only data from patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders were analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

The CGI-A is proposed as a quickly administrable scale for the assessment of patients' aggressiveness.

Managing the acutely agitated and psychotic patient

Agitation can present as an emergency in the course of numerous psychiatric conditions including intoxication, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and delirium. This article reviews relevant literature regarding the definition, etiology, measurement, and management of episodic agitation and pays particular attention to intramuscular treatments. The impact of changes in methodology between the era of first- and second-generation antipsychotics, the implications of those changes for external validity of studies of second-generation studies, and the recent evolution of expert consensus are discussed.