Droperidol v. haloperidol for sedation of aggressive behaviour in acute mental health: randomised controlled trial

Management of the Agitated Patient

The acutely agitated patient should be managed in a step-wise fashion, beginning with non-coercive de-escalation strategies and moving on to pharmacologic interventions and physical restraints as necessary. Face-to-face examination, monitoring, and documentation by the physician are essential. The emergency physician should be familiar with multiple pharmaceutical options, tailored to the individual patient. Use of ketamine, benzodiazepines and antipsychotics should be considered. Patient autonomy, safety, and medical well-being are paramount.

Comparison of Droperidol and Midazolam Versus Haloperidol and Lorazepam for Acute Agitation Management in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Acute agitation accounts for up to 2.6% of visits to the emergency department (ED). To date, a standard of care for the management of acute agitation has not been established. Few studies have evaluated antipsychotic and benzodiazepine combinations.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate effectiveness and safety of combination therapy for acute agitation with intramuscular (IM) droperidol and midazolam (D+M) compared with IM haloperidol and lorazepam (H+L) in patients in the ED.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective medical record review of patients presenting to a large, academic ED with acute agitation from July 2020 through October 2021. The primary outcome was percentage of patients requiring additional agitation medication within 60 minutes of combination administration. Secondary outcomes included average time to repeat dose administration and average number of repeat doses required before ED discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 306 patients were included for analysis: 102 in the D+M group and 204 in the H+L group. Repeat dose within 60 minutes occurred in 7 (6.9%) and 28 (13.8%) patients in the D+M and H+L groups, respectively (P = 0.065). A total of 28.4% of D+M patients and 30.9% of H+L patients required any repeat dose during their ED visit. Time to repeat dose was 12 and 24 minutes in the D+M and H+L, respectively (P = 0.22). The adverse event rate was 2.9% in each group.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

IM D+M resulted in a lower rate of repeat doses of acute agitation medication compared with IM H+L, though this was not statistically significant. Both therapies were safe, and the adverse event rate was low.

Management of paediatric acute severe behavioural disturbance in emergency departments across Australia: A PREDICT survey of senior medical staff

OBJECTIVE

Acute severe behavioural disturbance (ASBD) is a condition seen with increasing frequency in EDs. It poses a significant risk to the patient and those around them. Little is known about the epidemiology or most effective management in the paediatric population. The aim of the present study is to clarify the practice of senior emergency doctors in Australia when managing paediatric ASBD.

METHODS

The present study was a voluntary electronic questionnaire distributed to and undertaken by senior medical staff in EDs affiliated with the Paediatric Research in Emergency Departments International Collaborative (PREDICT) network. Respondents reported on exposure to and confidence in managing paediatric ASBD and their current practices.

RESULTS

A total of 227 (33%) clinicians completed the survey between February and May 2020. Most clinicians were caring for at least two young people with ASBD each week (72%), felt confident regarding the majority of components of management and referred to local clinical practice guidelines (69%). Agitation/sedation rating scales were seldom used (19%). There was a significant variation in self-reported management practices. The choice of whether to use medication at all, the medication chosen and route of administration all varied greatly. Respondents were more willing to provide parenteral medication to young people reported as having recreational drug intoxication (84%) than those with neurodevelopment disorders (65%) when the same degree of agitation was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Within Australia, there is considerable variation in paediatric ASBD practice, in particular regarding medication provision. Further prospective research is required to inform best clinical practice.

Retrospective evaluation of ketamine versus droperidol on time to restraint removal in agitated emergency department patients

PURPOSE

Acute agitation and violent behavior in the emergency department (ED) can lead to significant patient morbidity and contribute to the growing problem of workplace violence against health care providers. To our knowledge, there is no available literature directly comparing intramuscular ketamine to intramuscular droperidol in ED patients presenting with undifferentiated agitation. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the effectiveness and safety of these agents for acute agitation in the ED.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study conducted at an urban, academic ED. The primary endpoint was time from the first dose of study medication to restraint removal. Safety endpoints included incidence of bradycardia (heart rate < 60 bpm), hypotension (systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg), hypoxia (oxygen saturation < 90% or need for respiratory support), and incidence of intubation for ongoing agitation or respiratory failure.

RESULTS

An initial 189 patients were screened, of which, 92 met inclusion criteria. The median time from initial drug administration to restraint removal was 49 min (IQR 30, 168) in the ketamine group and 43 min (IQR 30, 80) in the droperidol group (Median difference 6 min; 95% CI [-7, 26]). There was no significant difference in rates of bradycardia (3% vs 3%, 95% CI [-7%, 8%]), hypotension (0% vs 2%, 95% CI [-5%, 2%]), or hypoxia (7% vs 10%, 95% CI [-15%, 9%]) in the ketamine versus droperidol groups respectively. One patient in the ketamine group was intubated for ongoing agitation, and one patient in the droperidol group was intubated for respiratory failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Intramuscular droperidol and intramuscular ketamine were associated with similar times from drug administration to restraint removal in patients presenting to the ED with undifferentiated agitation. Prospective studies are warranted to evaluate IM droperidol and IM ketamine head-to-head as first line agents for acute agitation in the ED.

Pharmacological Emergency management of Agitation in Children and Young people: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intraMuscular medication (PEAChY-M)

INTRODUCTION

Acute severe behavioural disturbance (ASBD) is a condition seen with increasing frequency in emergency departments (EDs) in adults and young people. Despite the increasing number of presentations and significant associated risks to patients, families and caregivers, there is limited evidence to guide the most effective pharmacological management in children and adolescents. The aim of this study is to determine whether a single dose of intramuscular olanzapine is more effective than intramuscular droperidol at successfully sedating young people with ASBD requiring intramuscular sedation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is a multicentre, open-label, superiority randomised controlled trial. Young people aged between 9 and 17 years and 364 days presenting to an ED with ASBD who are deemed to require medication for behavioural containment will be recruited to the study. Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 allocation between a single weight-based dose of intramuscular olanzapine and intramuscular droperidol. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants who achieve successful sedation at 1-hour post randomisation without the need for additional sedation. Secondary outcomes will include assessing for adverse events, additional medications provided in the ED, further episodes of ASBD, length of stay in the ED and hospital and satisfaction with management.Effectiveness will be determined using an intention-to-treat analysis, with medication efficacy determined as part of the secondary outcomes using a per-protocol analysis. The primary outcome of successful sedation at 1 hour will be presented as a percentage within each treatment group, with comparisons presented as a risk difference with its 95% CIs.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was received from the Royal Children's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/69948/RCHM-2021). This incorporated a waiver of informed consent for the study. The findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and at academic conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12621001238864.

Involvement of the NO/cGMP/K ATP pathway in the antinociceptive effect of rosemary ( Rosmarinus officinalis ) essential oil in mice

Rosemary essential oil (REO) has been used for several medical purposes. Previous studies have shown the antinociceptive effect of the oil. This study aimed to investigate the role of some well-known receptors in the antinociceptive effect of REO. Male Swiss mice (25-30 g) were used. To assess the antinociceptive activity, the formalin test was used. At first, the antinociceptive effect of three doses of rosemary oil (150, 300 and 450 µL/kg) was tested, and then a dose of 300 µL/kg was selected for the mechanistic study. Animals were pretreated with several antagonists and enzyme inhibitors to evaluate the role of adrenergic, cholinergic, serotoninergic, dopaminergic and opioid receptors as well as the NO/cGMP/K ATP pathway in the antinociceptive effect of rosemary essential oil. Yohimbine (5 mg/kg), prazocin (2 mg/kg), propranolol (2 mg/kg), atropine (2.5 mg/kg) naloxone (5 mg/kg), cyproheptadine (2 mg/kg), ondansetron (2 mg/kg) and haloperidol (1 mg/kg) could not reverse the antinociceptive effect. Sulpiride (20 mg/kg) only showed preventive activity in the early phase of formalin test while methylene blue (5 mg/kg), L-NAME (20 mg/kg) and glibenclamide (10 mg/kg) significantly attenuated the antinociceptive effect of REO in both phases. Tadalafil (2 mg/kg) potentiated the antinociceptive effect of REO in the late phase of formalin test and arginine (100 mg/kg) had no effect on both phases. Therefore the NO/cGMP/K ATP pathway might have an important role in the antinociceptive effect of REO.

Sensory-based interventions for the immediate de-escalation of agitation in people with dementia: A systematic review

Objectives: Sensory-based interventions are commonly used to reduce the occurrence of agitation in people with dementia over extended periods. However, the evidence regarding their immediate de-escalation effects is unclear. The objectives of this systematic review are to (a) identify which sensory-based interventions have been used for de-escalating agitation and (b) examine the immediate effects of these interventions on de-escalating agitation in people with dementia.Methods: A systematic review was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Data sources were identified by searching Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, and CINAHL for publications up to 2 March 2022. The de-escalating agitation effect had to be measured during the intervention or within 15 min after commencing the treatment. Only randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies published in English were included.Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria: two randomized controlled trials, one cross-over study, and six quasi-experimental studies. All were conducted in Western countries, involving a total of 246 participants. Music-related interventions were investigated in seven studies, and a positive effect on de-escalating agitation was found, with no side-effects. All of the studies had methodological limitations, including a single group design, blinding, an insufficient sample size, and imprecisely reported results.Conclusion: There is a profound dearth of rigorous studies examining the immediate agitation de-escalating effects of sensory-based interventions on people with dementia. However, the limited evidence on music-related interventions is encouraging. More rigorous research is recommended to confirm the effects.

Drug Repurposing: The Mechanisms and Signaling Pathways of Anti-Cancer Effects of Anesthetics

Cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. There are only limited treatment strategies that can be applied to treat cancer, including surgical resection, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy, but these have only limited effectiveness. Developing a new drug for cancer therapy is protracted, costly, and inefficient. Recently, drug repurposing has become a rising research field to provide new meaning for an old drug. By searching a drug repurposing database ReDO_DB, a brief list of anesthetic/sedative drugs, such as haloperidol, ketamine, lidocaine, midazolam, propofol, and valproic acid, are shown to possess anti-cancer properties. Therefore, in the current review, we will provide a general overview of the anti-cancer mechanisms of these anesthetic/sedative drugs and explore the potential underlying signaling pathways and clinical application of these drugs applied individually or in combination with other anti-cancer agents.

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.

Prospective real-time evaluation of the QTc interval variation after low-dose droperidol among emergency department patients

OBJECTIVE

To assess the QTc interval variation after low-dose droperidol in a population of undifferentiated, stable, and non-agitated patients receiving droperidol in the emergency department.

METHODS

Prospective cohort study of patients aged ≥12 years of age who received low-dose droperidol (≤ 2.5 mg) for indications other than acute behavioral disturbances. QTc intervals were monitored in real-time during pre-specified observation periods in the ED. Primary outcome was variation of QTc interval after droperidol administration, defined as the maximum delta (change) of QTc interval. Other outcomes included proportion of patients with a QTc ≥ 500 ms after droperidol, delta ≥ +60 ms, and incidence of clinical adverse events. Patients were monitored up to 30 min after IV bolus and up to 46 min after infusion.

RESULTS

A total of 68 patients were included (mean age 42.1 years, 66.2% females). The median dose of droperidol was 1.875 mg (range 0.625 mg, 2.5 mg) and 94.1% received droperidol for headache management. Most patients received droperidol as a 2-min bolus (n = 41, 60.3%). The mean maximum delta of QTc interval after droperidol across all 68 patients was +29.9 ms (SD 15). A total of 12 patients (17.6%) experienced a QTc interval ≥ 500 ms during the observation period after droperidol, and 3 patients (4.4%) had a delta QTc ≥ +60 ms. There were no serious arrhythmias, such as TdP, or deaths among the 68 participants in this study (0/68). However, 13.2% (n = 9) had at least one non-serious adverse event including restlessness and/or anxiety.

CONCLUSION

The QTc interval slightly increased after droperidol administration, but these prolongations were brief, mostly below 500 msec and did not lead to serious arrhythmias. The yield of continuous cardiac monitoring in patients receiving low doses of droperidol is likely low.

Managing acute agitation and aggression in the world of drug shortages

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

Intramuscular midazolam, olanzapine, or haloperidol for the management of acute agitation: A multi-centre, double-blind, randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The safety and effectiveness of intramuscular olanzapine or haloperidol compared to midazolam as the initial pharmacological treatment for acute agitation in emergency departments (EDs) has not been evaluated.

METHODS

A pragmatic, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled trial was conducted from December 2014 to September 2019, in six Hong Kong EDs. Patients (aged 18-75 years) with undifferentiated acute agitation requiring parenteral sedation were randomised to 5 mg intramuscular midazolam (n = 56), olanzapine (n = 54), or haloperidol (n = 57). Primary outcomes were time to adequate sedation and proportion of patients who achieved adequate sedation at each follow-up interval. Sedation levels were measured on a 6-level validated scale (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02380118).

FINDINGS

Of 206 patients randomised, 167 (mean age, 42 years; 98 [58·7%] male) were analysed. Median time to sedation for IM midazolam, olanzapine, and haloperidol was 8·5 (IQR 8·0), 11·5 (IQR 30·0), and 23·0 (IQR 21·0) min, respectively. At 60 min, similar proportions of patients were adequately sedated (98%, 87%, and 97%). There were statistically significant differences for time to sedation with midazolam compared to olanzapine (p = 0·03) and haloperidol (p = 0·002). Adverse event rates were similar across the three arms. Dystonia (n = 1) and cardiac arrest (n = 1) were reported in the haloperidol group.

INTERPRETATION

Midazolam resulted in faster sedation in patients with undifferentiated agitation in the emergency setting compared to olanzapine and haloperidol. Midazolam and olanzapine are preferred over haloperidol's slower time to sedation and potential for cardiovascular and extrapyramidal side effects.

FUNDING

Research Grants Council, Hong Kong.

Safety and efficacy of pharmacologic agents used for rapid tranquilization of emergency department patients with acute agitation or excited delirium

Introduction: Management of patients with acute agitation or aggressive behavior can pose a significant challenge to health-care providers in emergency departments. Areas covered: This article provides a comprehensive review of the pharmacologic properties, efficacy, and safety profiles of select intramuscular (IM) sedative agents (i.e., antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, and ketamine) for rapid tranquilization. Expert opinion: Using antipsychotics and benzodiazepines - whether a single agent or combined - will have similar efficacy in producing sedation. But there are differences in the time to sedation depending on which agent is used. Based upon the available studies, droperidol (5-10 mg IM) and midazolam (5-10 mg IM) have the fastest onset of sedation when either is used as a single agent. When combination therapy is used, using midazolam with an antipsychotic agent, instead of lorazepam, may result in faster sedative effect. QT prolongation and torsades de pointes are uncommon adverse drug effects of antipsychotic administration. Ketamine is often reserved as a second-line agent when antipsychotics and benzodiazepines fail to produce the desired tranquilization. However, ketamine (5 mg/kg IM) is more frequently associated with airway compromise requiring endotracheal intubation. A low-dose of ketamine (2 mg/kg IM) may reduce the risk of airway compromise while providing adequate sedation.

An evaluation of a video magnification-based system for respiratory rate monitoring in an acute mental health setting

CONTEXT

One of the most important goals of inpatient psychiatric care is to provide a safe and therapeutic environment for both patients and staff. A small number of aggressive or agitated patients are difficult to sedate, even after multiple doses of sedating antipsychotics. Adverse effects can result in harm to the patient and staff and that observations are conducted without touching the patient.

AIM

This study aims to determine if motion magnification can improve the feasibility of non-contact respirations monitoring over a video feed.

METHODS

Registered nurses were invited to view seven pairs of pre-recorded footage of healthy volunteers and count the number of breaths that they observe over a period of one minute for each. One of the paired videos was unprocessed and the other magnified the motion of chest rise and fall.

RESULTS

Nursing observation of respirations showed an improvement in reduction of count error from 15.7 % to 1.5 % after video magnification of respiratory movement. Nurses also stated that viewing the processed video was much easier to make their observations from.

CONCLUSION

It is possible to use magnified video to monitor respirations of patients during circumstances where it is potentially difficult to obtain. Further observational studies should be conducted on a larger scale with this type of technique and is urgently needed to inform practice.

Safety and effectiveness of olanzapine and droperidol for chemical restraint for non-consenting adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chemical restraint (CR) is emergency drug management for acute behavioural disturbances in people with mental illness, provided with the aim of rapid calming and de-escalating potentially dangerous situations.

AIMS

To describe a systematic review of Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) reporting on short-term safety and effectiveness of drugs used for CR, administered to non-consenting adults with mental health conditions, who require emergency management of acute behavioural disturbances. A meta-analysis was conducted of those RCTs with comparable interventions, outcome measures and measurement timeframes.

METHOD

Academic databases were searched for RCTs published between 1 January 1996 and 20th April 2020. Relevant RCTs were critically appraised using the 13-item JBI checklist. All RCTs were described, and step-wise filters were applied to identify studies suitable for meta-analysis. For these, forest and funnel plots were constructed, and Q and I² statistics guided interpretation of pooled findings, tested using MedCalc Version 19.1.

RESULTS

Of 23 relevant RCTs, 18 (78.2% total) had excellent methodological quality scores (at least 90%). Eight RCTs were potentially relevant for meta-analysis (six of excellent quality), reporting 20 drug arms in total. Adverse events for 6-36% patients were reported in all 20 drug arms. Four drug arms from two homogenous studies of N = 697 people were meta-analysed. These RCTs tested two antipsychotic drugs (droperidol, olanzapine) delivered intravenously in either 5 mgs or 10 mg doses, with outcomes of time to calm, percentage calm within five or 10 min, and adverse events. There were no significant differences between drug arms for either measure of calm. However, 5 mg olanzapine incurred significantly lower risk of adverse events than 10 mg olanzapine (OR 0.4 (95%CI 0.2-0.8)), although no dose differences were found for droperidol.

CONCLUSION

5 mg intravenous olanzapine is recommended for quick, safe emergency management of people with acute behavioural disturbances associated with mental illness.

Rage Against the Machine: Advancing the study of aggression ethology via machine learning

RATIONALE

Aggression, comorbid with neuropsychiatric disorders, exhibits with diverse clinical presentations and places a significant burden on patients, caregivers, and society. This diversity is observed because aggression is a complex behavior that can be ethologically demarcated as either appetitive (rewarding) or reactive (defensive), each with its own behavioral characteristics, functionality, and neural basis that may transition from adaptive to maladaptive depending on genetic and environmental factors. There has been a recent surge in the development of preclinical animal models for studying appetitive aggression-related behaviors and identifying the neural mechanisms guiding their progression and expression. However, adoption of these procedures is often impeded by the arduous task of manually scoring complex social interactions. Manual observations are generally susceptible to observer drift, long analysis times, and poor inter-rater reliability, and are further incompatible with the sampling frequencies required of modern neuroscience methods.

OBJECTIVES

In this review, we discuss recent advances in the preclinical study of appetitive aggression in mice, paired with our perspective on the potential for machine learning techniques in producing automated, robust scoring of aggressive social behavior. We discuss critical considerations for implementing valid computer classifications within behavioral pharmacological studies.

KEY RESULTS

Open-source automated classification platforms can match or exceed the performance of human observers while removing the confounds of observer drift, bias, and inter-rater reliability. Furthermore, unsupervised approaches can identify previously uncharacterized aggression-related behavioral repertoires in model species.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Advances in open-source computational approaches hold promise for overcoming current manual annotation caveats while also introducing and generalizing computational neuroethology to the greater behavioral neuroscience community. We propose that currently available open-source approaches are sufficient for overcoming the main limitations preventing wide adoption of machine learning within the context of preclinical aggression behavioral research.

International research into 22 years of use of chemical restraint: An evidence overview

BACKGROUND

Chemical restraint (CR) (also known as rapid tranquilisation) is the forced (non-consenting) administration of medications to manage uncontrolled aggression, anxiety, or violence in people who are likely to cause harm to themselves or others. Our population of interest was adults with mental health disorders (with/without substance abuse). There has been a growing international movement over the past 22 years towards reducing/eliminating restrictive practices such as CR. It is appropriate to summarise the research that has been published over this time, identify trends and gaps in knowledge, and highlight areas for new research to inform practice.

AIMS

To undertake a comprehensive systematic search to identify, and describe, the volume and nature of primary international research into CR published since 1995.

METHODS

This paper reports the processes and overall findings of a systematic search for all available primary research on CR published between 1 January 1996 and 31 July 2018. It describes the current evidence base by hierarchy of evidence, country (ies) producing the research, CR definitions, study purpose, and outcome measures.

RESULTS

This review identified 311 relevant primary studies (21 RCTs; 46 non-controlled experimental or prospective observational studies; 77 cross-sectional studies; 69 retrospective studies; 67 opinion pieces, position or policy statements; and 31 qualitative studies). The USA, UK, and Australia contributed over half the research, whilst cross-country collaborations comprised 6% of it. The most common research settings comprised acute psychiatric wards (23.3%), general psychiatric wards (21.6%), and general hospital emergency departments (19.0%).

DISCUSSION

A key lesson learnt whilst compiling this database of research into CR was to ensure that all papers described non-consenting administration of medications to manage adults with uncontrolled aggression, anxiety, or violence. There were tensions in the literature between using effective CR without producing adverse events, and how to decide when CR was needed (compared with choosing non-chemical intervention for behavioural emergencies), respecting patients' dignity whilst safeguarding their safety, and preserving safe workplaces for staff, and care environments for other patients. The range of outcome measures suggests opportunities to standardise future research.

Organisational interventions for preventing and minimising aggression directed towards healthcare workers by patients and patient advocates

BACKGROUND

Workplace aggression is becoming increasingly prevalent in health care, with serious consequences for both individuals and organisations. Research and development of organisational interventions to prevent and minimise workplace aggression has also increased. However, it is not known if interventions prevent or reduce occupational violence directed towards healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of organisational interventions that aim to prevent and minimise workplace aggression directed towards healthcare workers by patients and patient advocates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases from inception to 25 May 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Wiley Online Library); MEDLINE (PubMed); CINAHL (EBSCO); Embase (embase.com); PsycINFO (ProQuest); NIOSHTIC (OSH-UPDATE); NIOSHTIC-2 (OSH-UPDATE); HSELINE (OSH-UPDATE); and CISDOC (OSH-UPDATE). We also searched the ClinicalTrials.gov (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portals (www.who.int/ictrp/en).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) of any organisational intervention to prevent and minimise verbal or physical aggression directed towards healthcare workers and their peers in their workplace by patients or their advocates. The primary outcome measure was episodes of aggression resulting in no harm, psychological, or physical harm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods for data collection and analysis. This included independent data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment by at least two review authors per included study. We used the Haddon Matrix to categorise interventions aimed at the victim, the vector or the environment of the aggression and whether the intervention was applied before, during or after the event of aggression. We used the random-effects model for the meta-analysis and GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies. Four studies were conducted in nursing home settings, two studies were conducted in psychiatric wards and one study was conducted in an emergency department. Interventions in two studies focused on prevention of aggression by the vector in the pre-event phase, being 398 nursing home residents and 597 psychiatric patients. The humour therapy in one study in a nursing home setting did not have clear evidence of a reduction of overall aggression (mean difference (MD) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.34; very low-quality evidence). A short-term risk assessment in the other study showed a decreased incidence of aggression (risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.78; very low-quality evidence) compared to practice as usual. Two studies compared interventions to minimise aggression by the vector in the event phase to practice as usual. In both studies the event was aggression during bathing of nursing home patients. In one study, involving 18 residents, music was played during the bathing period and in the other study, involving 69 residents, either a personalised shower or a towel bath was used. The studies provided low-quality evidence that the interventions may result in a medium-sized reduction of overall aggression (standardised mean difference (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.05; 2 studies), and physical aggression (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.46 to -0.24; 1 study; very low-quality evidence), but not in verbal aggression (SMD -0.31, 95% CI; -0.89 to 0.27; 1 study; very low-quality evidence). One intervention focused on the vector, the pre-event phase and the event phase. The study compared a two-year culture change programme in a nursing home to practice as usual and involved 101 residents. This study provided very low-quality evidence that the intervention may result in a medium-sized reduction of physical aggression (MD 0.51, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.91), but there was no clear evidence that it reduced verbal aggression (MD 0.76, 95% CI -0.02 to 1.54). Two studies evaluated a multicomponent intervention that focused on the vector (psychiatry patients and emergency department patients), the victim (nursing staff), and the environment during the pre-event and the event phase. The studies included 564 psychiatric staff and 209 emergency department staff. Both studies involved a comprehensive package of actions aimed at preventing violence, managing violence and environmental changes. There was no clear evidence that the psychiatry intervention may result in a reduction of overall aggression (odds ratio (OR) 0.85, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.15; low-quality evidence), compared to the control condition. The emergency department study did not result in a reduction of aggression (MD = 0) but provided insufficient data to test this.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found very low to low-quality evidence that interventions focused on the vector during the pre-event phase, the event phase or both, may result in a reduction of overall aggression, compared to practice as usual, and we found inconsistent low-quality evidence for multi-component interventions. None of the interventions included the post-event stage. To improve the evidence base, we need more RCT studies, that include the workers as participants and that collect information on the impact of violence on the worker in a range of healthcare settings, but especially in emergency care settings. Consensus on standardised outcomes is urgently needed.

The effectiveness of chemical restraint in managing acute agitation and aggression: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

One approach to manage people with behaviours of concern including agitated or aggressive behaviours in health care settings is through the use of fast-acting medication, called chemical restraint. Such management often needs to be delivered in crisis situations to patients who are at risk of harm to themselves or others. This paper summarizes the available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of chemical restraint from 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 3788 patients. The RCTs were of moderate to high quality and were conducted in pre-hospital, hospital emergency department, or ward settings. Drugs used in chemical restraint included olanzapine, haloperidol, droperidol, risperidol, flunitrazepam, midazolam, promethazine, ziprasidone, sodium valproate, or lorazepam. There was limited comparability between studies in drug choice, combination, dose, method of administration (oral, intramuscular, or intravenous drip), or timing of repeat administrations. There were 31 outcome measures, which were inconsistently reported. They included subjective measures of behaviours, direct measures of treatment effect (time to calm; time to sleep), indirect measures of agitation (staff or patient injuries, duration of agitative or aggressive episodes, subsequent violent episodes), and adverse events. The most common were time to calm and adverse events. There was little clarity about the superiority of any chemical method of managing behaviours of concern exhibited by patients in Emergency Departments or acute mental health settings. Not only is more targeted research essential, but best practice recommendations for such situations requires integrating expert input into the current evidence base.

An examination of the incidence and nature of chemical restraint on adult acute psychiatric inpatient units in Adelaide, South Australia

Reducing and/or eliminating the use of coercive measures in psychiatric services is a priority worldwide. Chemical restraint is one such measure, yet to date has been poorly defined and poorly investigated. The aim of this study was to examine chemical restraint use in 12 adult acute inpatient psychiatric units in Adelaide, South Australia. Methods involved the analysis of all reported chemical restraint events occurring over a 12-month period analysed using a descriptive quantitative design. There were 166 chemical restraint events involving 110 consumers. The highest prevalence rate in an individual unit was 28.78 events per 1000 occupied bed days, with the lowest being 0.12 events per 1000 occupied bed days. More males (n = 69, 57.5%) were involved in chemical restraint than females. Schizophrenia, schizotypal, and delusional disorders were the predominant diagnoses among consumers who were chemically restrained. The most events occurred during three time blocks: 14.00-14.59 pm, 16.00-16.59 pm, and 21.00-21.59 pm. The two most common medications used were olanzapine and clonazepam. The study presents a general picture of the practice of chemical restraint in Adelaide and identifies areas of concern in relation to the need for monitoring of side effects and completion of systematic processes of documentation regarding chemical restraint events. Findings highlight the need for sustained focus on reducing the need for chemical restraint and exploring less restrictive measures with those most likely to receive medication against their will.

Animal Models of (or for) Aggression Reward, Addiction, and Relapse: Behavior and Circuits

Inappropriate and pathological aggression plays a leading role in the suffering and death of millions of people, and further places an untenable strain on the caregivers and families of those afflicted. In some cases, such as addictive drugs, aggression can be highly rewarding (appetitive) and continually pursued despite short- and long-term negative consequences. Similarly, recidivism (relapse) rates for repeat violent offenders are as high as relapse rates for drug addicts. Appetitive aggression and relapse to aggression seeking can be modeled in mice studies using conditioned place preference and self-administration procedures followed by a period of abstinence and subsequent tests for relapse to aggression preference and aggression seeking. These procedures allow for the study of the mechanisms that control the appetitive versus the consummatory (attack) phases of aggressive behavior. In this review, we first discuss the behavioral procedures developed to probe appetitive aggression in mouse models, spanning from Pavlovian to operant tasks, and we also describe the recently proposed phenomenon of "aggression addiction." Next, we discuss the pharmacological and circuit mechanisms of aggression conditioned place preference and aggression self-administration, seeking, and relapse, highlighting mechanistic congruence and divergence between appetitive and consummatory phases of aggression. We conclude by discussing clinical implications of the studies reviewed.

Nucleus Accumbens Drd1-Expressing Neurons Control Aggression Self-Administration and Aggression Seeking in Mice

We recently developed a mouse model of appetitive operant aggression and reported that adult male outbred CD-1 mice lever-press for the opportunity to attack subordinate male mice and relapse to aggression seeking during abstinence. Here we studied the role of nucleus accumbens (NAc) dopamine receptor (Drd)1- and Drd2-expressing neurons in aggression self-administration and aggression seeking. We trained CD-1 mice to self-administer intruders (9 d, 12 trials/d) and tested them for aggression self-administration and aggression seeking on abstinence Day 1. We used immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization to measure the neuronal activity marker Fos in the NAc, and cell-type-specific colocalization of Fos with Drd1- and Drd2-expressing neurons. To test the causal role of Drd1- and Drd2-expressing neurons, we validated a transgenic hybrid breeding strategy crossing inbred Drd1-Cre and Drd2-Cre transgenic mice with outbred CD-1 mice and used cell-type-specific Cre-DREADD (hM4Di) to inhibit NAc Drd1- and Drd2-expressing neuron activity. We found that aggression self-administration and aggression seeking induced higher Fos expression in NAc shell than in core, that Fos colocalized with Drd1 and Drd2 in both subregions, and that chemogenetic inhibition of Drd1-, but not Drd2-, expressing neurons decreased aggression self-administration and aggression seeking. Results indicate a cell-type-specific role of Drd1-expressing neurons that is critical for both aggression self-administration and aggression seeking. Our study also validates a simple breeding strategy between outbred CD-1 mice and inbred C57-based Cre lines that can be used to study cell-type and circuit mechanisms of aggression reward and relapse.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Aggression is often comorbid with neuropsychiatric diseases, including drug addiction. One form, appetitive aggression, exhibits symptomatology that mimics that of drug addiction and is hypothesized to be due to dysregulation of addiction-related reward circuits. However, our mechanistic understanding of the circuitry modulating appetitive operant aggression is limited. Here we used a novel mouse model of aggression self-administration and relapse, in combination with immunohistochemistry, in situ hybridization, and chemogenetic manipulations to examine how cell types in the nucleus accumbens are recruited for, and control, operant aggression self-administration and aggression seeking on abstinence Day 1. We found that one population, dopamine receptor 1-expressing neurons, act as a critical modulator of operant aggression reward and aggression seeking.

The pharmacological management of agitated and aggressive behaviour: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction:

Non-pharmacological interventions preferably precede pharmacological interventions in acute agitation. Reviews of pharmacological interventions remain descriptive or compare only one compound with several other compounds. The goal of this study is to compute a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect on restoring calmness after a pharmacological intervention, so a more precise recommendation is possible.

Method:

A search in Pubmed and Embase was done to isolate RCT’s considering pharmacological interventions in acute agitation. The outcome is reaching calmness within maximum of 2 h, assessed by the psychometric scales of PANSS-EC, CGI or ACES. Also the percentages of adverse effects was assessed.

Results:

Fifty-three papers were included for a systematic review and meta-analysis. Most frequent studied drug is olanzapine. Changes on PANNS-EC and ACES at 2 h showed the strongest changes for haloperidol plus promethazine, risperidon, olanzapine, droperidol and aripiprazole. However, incomplete data showed that the effect of risperidon is overestimated. Adverse effects are most prominent for haloperidol and haloperidol plus lorazepam.

Conclusion:

Olanzapine, haloperidol plus promethazine or droperidol are most effective and safe for use as rapid tranquilisation. Midazolam sedates most quickly. But due to increased saturation problems, midazolam is restricted to use within an emergency department of a general hospital.

Functions of medial hypothalamic and mesolimbic dopamine circuitries in aggression

Aggression is a crucial survival behavior: it is employed to defend territory, compete for food and mating opportunities, protect kin, and resolve disputes. Although widely differing in its behavioral expression, aggression is observed across many species. The neural substrates of aggression have been investigated for nearly a century and two highly conserved circuitries emerge as critical substrates for generating and modulating aggression. One circuitry centers on the medial hypothalamus. Activity of the medial hypothalamic cells closely correlates with attacks and can bi-directionally modulate aggressive behaviors. The other aggression-related circuit involves the mesolimbic dopamine cells. Dopaminergic antagonists are the most commonly used treatment for suppressing human aggression in psychotic patients. Animal studies support essential roles of dopaminergic signaling in the nucleus accumbens in assessing the reward value of aggression and reinforcing the aggressive behaviors. In this review, we will provide an overview regarding the functions of medial hypothalamus and dopaminergic system in mediating aggressive behaviors and the potential interactions between these two circuitries.

Joint BAP NAPICU evidence-based consensus guidelines for the clinical management of acute disturbance: De-escalation and rapid tranquillisation

The British Association for Psychopharmacology and the National Association of Psychiatric Intensive Care and Low Secure Units developed this joint evidence-based consensus guideline for the clinical management of acute disturbance. It includes recommendations for clinical practice and an algorithm to guide treatment by healthcare professionals with various options outlined according to their route of administration and category of evidence. Fundamental overarching principles are included and highlight the importance of treating the underlying disorder. There is a focus on three key interventions: de-escalation, pharmacological interventions pre-rapid tranquillisation and rapid tranquillisation (intramuscular and intravenous). Most of the evidence reviewed relates to emergency psychiatric care or acute psychiatric adult inpatient care, although we also sought evidence relevant to other common clinical settings including the general acute hospital and forensic psychiatry. We conclude that the variety of options available for the management of acute disturbance goes beyond the standard choices of lorazepam, haloperidol and promethazine and includes oral-inhaled loxapine, buccal midazolam, as well as a number of oral antipsychotics in addition to parenteral options of intramuscular aripiprazole, intramuscular droperidol and intramuscular olanzapine. Intravenous options, for settings where resuscitation equipment and trained staff are available to manage medical emergencies, are also included.

Evidence-based review and appraisal of the use of droperidol in the emergency department

Droperidol is a short-acting, potent dopamine D2 antagonist that can pass through the blood-brain barrier. A black box warning was issued for droperidol by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 2001 because of a risk of development of torsades de pointes induced by QT prolongation. Many experts feel that the incidence of arrhythmia is overestimated, and low-dose droperidol is almost always used by anesthesiologists for postoperative nausea and vomiting. In this review, we used evidence-based analysis to appraise high-quality studies with a low risk of bias published after 2001 on the use of droperidol in the emergency department (ED). Droperidol appears not only efficacious but also safe to treat patients with nausea/vomiting, acute psychosis, and migraine in the ED. For these conditions, droperidol may be an option for shared decision-making.

Spontaneous recovery of traumatic brain injury-induced functional deficits is not hindered by daily administration of lorazepam

Agitation and aggression are common sequelae of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and pose a challenge to physicians and other health providers during acute patient care and subsequent neurorehabilitation. Antipsychotic drugs (APDs) are routinely administered to manage TBI patients displaying such maladaptive behaviors despite several clinical and preclinical studies demonstrating that they hinder recovery. A potentially viable alternative to APDs may be the benzodiazepines, which have differing mechanisms of action. Hence, the aim of the study was to test the hypothesis that lorazepam (LOR) would not impede recovery after TBI. Anesthetized adult male rats received a cortical impact or sham injury and then were intraperitoneally administered LOR (0.1mg/kg, 1.0mg/kg, or 2.0mg/kg) or vehicle (VEH; 1mL/kg) commencing 24-h after surgery and once daily for 19days. Motor and cognitive outcomes were assessed on post-operative days 1-5 and 14-19, respectively. No differences were revealed among the four sham control groups and thus they were pooled into one inclusive SHAM group. The SHAMs performed better than all TBI groups on all assessments (p<0.05). Regarding TBI, the 2.0mg/kg LOR group performed better than the VEH and 0.1mg/kg or 1.0mg/kg LOR groups on every task (p<0.05); no differences were observed among the latter three groups on any endpoint (p>0.05). Overall, these preclinical behavioral data support the hypothesis and reveal a therapeutic benefit with the higher dose of LOR. The findings suggest that LOR may be an alternative, to APDs, for controlling agitation without compromising spontaneous recovery and perhaps could afford a dual benefit by also promoting therapeutic efficacy.

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

BACKGROUND

Haloperidol used alone is recommended to help calm situations of aggression or agitation for people with psychosis. It is widely accessible and may be the only antipsychotic medication available in limited-resource areas.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether haloperidol alone is an effective treatment for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation, wherein clinicians are required to intervene to prevent harm to self and others.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (26th May 2016). This register is compiled by systematic searches of major resources (including AMED, BIOSIS CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and registries of clinical trials) and their monthly updates, handsearches, grey literature, and conference proceedings, with no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people exhibiting aggression and/or agitation thought to be due to psychosis, allocated rapid use of haloperidol alone (by any route), compared with any other treatment. Outcomes of interest included tranquillisation or asleep by 30 minutes, repeated need for rapid tranquillisation within 24 hours, specific behaviours (threat or injury to others/self), adverse effects. We included trials meeting our selection criteria and providing useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

We found nine new RCTs from the 2016 update search, giving a total of 41 included studies and 24 comparisons. Few studies were undertaken in circumstances that reflect real-world practice, and, with notable exceptions, most were small and carried considerable risk of bias. Due to the large number of comparisons, we can only present a summary of main results.Compared with placebo, more people in the haloperidol group were asleep at two hours (2 RCTs, n=220, RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.82 to 0.95, very low-quality evidence) and experienced dystonia (2 RCTs, n=207, RR 7.49, 95%CI 0.93 to 60.21, very low-quality evidence).Compared with aripiprazole, people in the haloperidol group required fewer injections than those in the aripiprazole group (2 RCTs, n=473, RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.62 to 0.99, low-quality evidence). More people in the haloperidol group experienced dystonia (2 RCTs, n=477, RR 6.63, 95%CI 1.52 to 28.86, very low-quality evidence).Four trials (n=207) compared haloperidol with lorazepam with no significant differences with regard to number of participants asleep at one hour (1 RCT, n=60, RR 1.05, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.44, very low-quality of evidence) or those requiring additional injections (1 RCT, n=66, RR 1.14, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.43, very low-quality of evidence).Haloperidol's adverse effects were not offset by addition of lorazepam (e.g. dystonia 1 RCT, n=67, RR 8.25, 95%CI 0.46 to 147.45, very low-quality of evidence).Addition of promethazine was investigated in two trials (n=376). More people in the haloperidol group were not tranquil or asleep by 20 minutes (1 RCT, n=316, RR 1.60, 95%CI 1.18 to 2.16, moderate-quality evidence). Acute dystonia was too common in the haloperidol alone group for the trial to continue beyond the interim analysis (1 RCT, n=316, RR 19.48, 95%CI 1.14 to 331.92, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Additional data from new studies does not alter previous conclusions of this review. If no other alternative exists, sole use of intramuscular haloperidol could be life-saving. Where additional drugs are available, sole use of haloperidol for extreme emergency could be considered unethical. Addition of the sedating promethazine has support from better-grade evidence from within randomised trials. Use of an alternative antipsychotic drug is only partially supported by fragmented and poor-grade evidence. Adding a benzodiazepine to haloperidol does not have strong evidence of benefit and carries risk of additional harm.After six decades of use for emergency rapid tranquillisation, this is still an area in need of good independent trials relevant to real-world practice.

Droperidol for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation

BACKGROUND

People experiencing acute psychotic illnesses, especially those associated with agitated or violent behaviour, may require urgent pharmacological tranquillisation or sedation. Droperidol, a butyrophenone antipsychotic, has been used for this purpose in several countries.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effects of droperidol, including its cost-effectiveness, when compared to placebo, other 'standard' or 'non-standard' treatments, or other forms of management of psychotic illness, in controlling acutely disturbed behaviour and reducing psychotic symptoms in people with schizophrenia-like illnesses.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated previous searches by searching the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register (18 December 2015). We searched references of all identified studies for further trial citations and contacted authors of trials. We supplemented these electronic searches by handsearching reference lists and contacting both the pharmaceutical industry and relevant authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with useable data that compared droperidol to any other treatment for people acutely ill with suspected acute psychotic illnesses, including schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, mixed affective disorders, the manic phase of bipolar disorder or a brief psychotic episode.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For included studies, we assessed quality, risk of bias and extracted data. We excluded data when more than 50% of participants were lost to follow-up. For binary outcomes, we calculated standard estimates of risk ratio (RR) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). We created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four relevant trials from the update search (previous version of this review included only two trials). When droperidol was compared with placebo, for the outcome of tranquillisation or asleep by 30 minutes we found evidence of a clear difference (1 RCT, N = 227, RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31, high-quality evidence). There was a clear demonstration of reduced risk of needing additional medication after 60 minutes for the droperidol group (1 RCT, N = 227, RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.85, high-quality evidence). There was no evidence that droperidol caused more cardiovascular arrhythmia (1 RCT, N = 227, RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.31, moderate-quality evidence) and respiratory airway obstruction (1 RCT, N = 227, RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.52, low-quality evidence) than placebo. For 'being ready for discharge', there was no clear difference between groups (1 RCT, N = 227, RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.48, high-quality evidence). There were no data for mental state and costs.Similarly, when droperidol was compared to haloperidol, for the outcome of tranquillisation or asleep by 30 minutes we found evidence of a clear difference (1 RCT, N = 228, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.09, high-quality evidence). There was a clear demonstration of reduced risk of needing additional medication after 60 minutes for participants in the droperidol group (2 RCTs, N = 255, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.90, high-quality evidence). There was no evidence that droperidol caused more cardiovascular hypotension (1 RCT, N = 228, RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.30 to 26.49,moderate-quality evidence) and cardiovascular hypotension/desaturation (1 RCT, N = 228, RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.12 to 67.98, low-quality evidence) than haloperidol. There was no suggestion that use of droperidol was unsafe. For mental state, there was no evidence of clear difference between the efficacy of droperidol compared to haloperidol (Scale for Quantification of Psychotic Symptom Severity, 1 RCT, N = 40, mean difference (MD) 0.11, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.29, low-quality evidence). There were no data for service use and costs.Whereas, when droperidol was compared with midazolam, for the outcome of tranquillisation or asleep by 30 minutes we found droperidol to be less acutely tranquillising than midazolam (1 RCT, N = 153, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.28, high-quality evidence). As regards the 'need for additional medication by 60 minutes after initial adequate sedation, we found an effect (1 RCT, N = 153, RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.20, moderate-quality evidence). In terms of adverse effects, we found no statistically significant differences between the two drugs for either airway obstruction (1 RCT, N = 153, RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.55, low-quality evidence) or respiratory hypoxia (1 RCT, N = 153, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.03, moderate-quality evidence) - but use of midazolam did result in three people (out of around 70) needing some sort of 'airway management' with no such events in the droperidol group. There were no data for mental state, service use and costs.Furthermore, when droperidol was compared to olanzapine, for the outcome of tranquillisation or asleep by any time point, we found no clear differences between the older drug (droperidol) and olanzapine (e.g. at 30 minutes: 1 RCT, N = 221, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.11, high-quality evidence). There was a suggestion that participants allocated droperidol needed less additional medication after 60 minutes than people given the olanzapine (1 RCT, N = 221, RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.87, high-quality evidence). There was no evidence that droperidol caused more cardiovascular arrhythmia (1 RCT, N = 221, RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.88, moderate-quality evidence) and respiratory airway obstruction (1 RCT, N = 221, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.20 to 4.72, low-quality evidence) than olanzapine. For 'being ready for discharge', there was no difference between groups (1 RCT, N = 221, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.34, high-quality evidence). There were no data for mental state and costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Previously, the use of droperidol was justified based on experience rather than evidence from well-conducted and reported randomised trials. However, this update found high-quality evidence with minimal risk of bias to support the use of droperidol for acute psychosis. Also, we found no evidence to suggest that droperidol should not be a treatment option for people acutely ill and disturbed because of serious mental illnesses.

Population pharmacokinetics of intramuscular droperidol in acutely agitated patients

BACKGROUND

Intramuscular droperidol is used increasingly for sedation of aggressive and violent patients. This study aimed to characterise the pharmacokinetics of intramuscular droperidol in these patients to determine how rapidly it is absorbed and the expected duration of measurable drug concentrations.

METHODS

We undertook a population pharmacokinetic analysis of a subgroup of patients from a clinical trial comparing droperidol and midazolam: 17 receiving 5 mg and 24 receiving 10 mg droperidol. Droperidol was measured using high-performance liquid chromatography. Pharmacokinetic modelling was performed under a nonlinear mixed effects modelling framework (NONMEM v7.2). The model was used to simulate concentration time profiles of three typical doses, 5 mg, 10 mg and 10 mg + 10 mg repeated at 15 min.

RESULTS

A two-compartment first-order input with first-order output model fitted the data best. The absorption rate constant was poorly characterised by the data and an estimate of the first order rate constant of absorption when fixed to 10 h^-1 provided a stable model and lowest objective function. This represents extremely rapid absorption with a half-life of 5 min. The final model had a clearance of 41.9 l h^-1 and volume of distribution of the central compartment of, 73.6 l. Median and interquartile range of initial (alpha) half-life was 0.32 h (0.26-0.37 h) and second (beta) half-life was 3.0 h (2.5-3.6 h). Simulations indicate that 10 mg alone provides an 80% probability of being above the lower limit of quantification (5 μg l^-1 ) for 7 h, 2 h longer than for 5 mg. Giving two 10 mg doses increased this duration to 10 h.

CONCLUSIONS

Intramuscular droperidol is rapidly absorbed with high therapeutic concentrations after 5 and 10 mg doses, and supports clinical data in which droperidol sedates rapidly for up to 6 h.