RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Restraint use in the emergency department (ED) can pose significant risks to patients and health care workers. We evaluate the effectiveness of Code De-escalation- a standardized, team-based approach for management and assessment of threatening behaviors- in reducing physical restraint use and workplace violence in a community ED. METHODS: A retrospective observational study of a pathway on physical restraint use among patients placed on an involuntary psychiatric hold in a community ED. This pathway includes a built-in step for the team members to systematically assess perceptions of threats from the patient behavior and threats perceived by the patient. Our primary outcome was the change in the rate of physical restraint use among patients on an involuntary psychiatric hold. Our secondary outcome was the change in the rate of workplace violence events involving all ED encounters. We evaluated our outcomes by comparing all encounters in a ten-month period before and after implementation, and compared our results to rates at neighboring community hospitals within the same hospital network. RESULTS: Pre intervention there were 434 ED encounters involving a psychiatric hold, post-intervention there were 535. We observed a significant decrease in physical restraint use, from 7.4% to 3.7% (ARR 0.028 [95% CI 0.002-0.055], p < 0.05). This was not seen at the control sites. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized de-escalation algorithm can be effective in helping ED's decrease their use of physical restraints in management of psychiatric patients experiencing agitation.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Mental health visits to the emergency department (ED) by children are rising in the United States, and acute agitation during these visits presents safety risks to patients and staff. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess barriers and strategies for providing high-quality care to children who experience acute agitation in the ED. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 6 ED physicians, 6 ED nurses, 6 parents, and 6 adolescents at high risk for developing agitation. We asked participants about their experiences with acute agitation care in the ED, barriers and facilitators to providing high-quality care, and proposed interventions. Interviews were coded and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Participants discussed identifying risk factors for acute agitation, worrying about safety and the risk of injury, feeling moral distress, and shifting the culture toward patient-centered, trauma-informed care. Barriers and facilitators included using a standardized care pathway, identifying environmental barriers and allocating resources, partnering with the family and child, and communicating among team members. Nine interventions were proposed: opening a behavioral observation unit with dedicated staff and space, asking screening questions to identify risk of agitation, creating personalized care plans in the electronic health record, using a standardized agitation severity scale, implementing a behavioral response team, providing safe activities and environmental modifications, improving the handoff process, educating staff, and addressing bias and inequities. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding barriers can inform solutions to improve care for children who experience acute agitation in the ED. The perspectives of families and patients should be considered when designing interventions to improve care.

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To examine the safety and effectiveness of benzodiazepines (BZD) as compared to antipsychotics for the management of acute agitation in older adults in the emergency department (ED). BASIC PROCEDURES: Retrospective observational cohort study of 21 EDs across four states in the US, including adults ≥60 years old who received either BZD or antipsychotics for acute agitation in the ED and subsequently were admitted to the hospital. Safety was measured as presence of adverse events: respiratory depression, cardiovascular effects, extrapyramidal side effects, or a fall during hospitalization. Effectiveness was measured as indicators of treatment failure: need for additional medication, one-to-one observation, or physical restraints following initial medication administration. Proportions and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to assess the association between potential risk factors and for efficacy and safety endpoints. MAIN FINDINGS: A total of 684 patients were included (63.9% received a BZD and 36.1% an antipsychotic). There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between groups (20.6% vs 14.6%, difference 6.0%, 95% CI -0.2% to 11.8%), but there was a higher intubation rate in the BZD group (2.7% vs 0.4%, difference 2.3%). There were more treatment failures in the antipsychotic group for the composite primary efficacy endpoint (94.3% vs 87.6%, difference 6.7%, 95% CI 2.5% to 10.9%). This appears to have been driven by the need for 1:1 observation; sensitivity analysis excluding 1:1 observation in the composite outcome demonstrated no significant difference with a failure rate of 38.5% in the antipsychotic group and 35.2% in the benzodiazepine group. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: Overall there are high rates of treatment failure among agitated older adults receiving pharmacological treatment for agitation in the emergency department. The optimal selection of pharmacological treatment for agitation in older adults should be made considering patient-specific factors that could increase the risk of adverse effects or treatment failure.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Nurses in the emergency department often encounter patients exhibiting signs of aggressive behavior. Nurses need to know the pharmacologic treatment appropriate for the patient scenario to ensure safety for the patient and the emergency department team. This case review examines 4 common scenarios where a patient exhibits aggressive behavior. After each case review is a discussion about the appropriate pharmacologic therapy for that patient. The cases portrayed are fictional but based on experience and previous observations.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the combination of intramuscular (IM) droperidol/midazolam to haloperidol/lorazepam regarding time to sedation in patients with acute undifferentiated agitation in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This was a prospective, unblinded observational study in the ED of a university teaching hospital. Subjects with acute undifferentiated agitation refractory to verbal de-escalation were assigned to receive a combination of either haloperidol 5 mg/lorazepam 2 mg or droperidol 5 mg/midazolam 5 mg IM. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients adequately sedated at 10 min defined as ED Sedation Assessment Tool (SAT) score of 0 or less. Secondary outcomes included change in ED SAT score at 5, 15, 30, and 60 min, the need for oxygen supplementation, and the need for airway intervention. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients were enrolled in the study, with 43 patients receiving droperidol/midazolam and 43 patients receiving haloperidol/lorazepam. Ten minutes after receiving medication, 51.2% of patients in the droperidol/midazolam group were adequately sedated compared to 7% of patients in the haloperidol/lorazepam group (OR: 14; 95% CI: 3.7, 52.1). Median time to adequate sedation was 10 min for the droperidol/midazolam group and 30 min for the haloperidol/lorazepam group. Eleven patients (25.6%) in the droperidol/midazolam group received oxygen supplementation compared to four patients (9.3%) in the haloperidol/lorazepam group. No study patients experienced extrapyramidal symptoms or required endotracheal intubation. CONCLUSION: Intramuscular droperidol/midazolam was superior to intramuscular haloperidol/lorazepam in achieving adequate sedation at 10 min. Patients in the droperidol/midazolam arm may be more likely to receive oxygen supplementation than those in the haloperidol/lorazepam arm.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: A multicenter randomized clinical trial in Hong Kong Accident and Emergency (A&E) departments concluded that intramuscular (IM) olanzapine is noninferior to haloperidol and midazolam, in terms of efficacy and safety, for the management of acutely agitated patients in A&E setting. Determining their comparative cost-effectiveness will further provide an economic perspective to inform the choice of sedative in this setting. METHODS: This analysis used data from a randomized clinical trial conducted in Hong Kong A&E departments between December 2014 and September 2019. A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the 3 sedatives was conducted, from the A&E perspective and a within-trial time horizon, using a decision-analytic model. Sensitivity analyses were also undertaken. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, median total management costs associated with IM midazolam, haloperidol, and olanzapine were Hong Kong dollar (HKD) 1958.9 (US dollar [USD] 251.1), HKD 2504.5 (USD 321.1), and HKD 2467.6 (USD 316.4), respectively. Agitation management labor cost was the main cost driver, whereas drug costs contributed the least. Midazolam dominated over haloperidol and olanzapine. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses supported that midazolam remains dominant > 95% of the time and revealed no clear difference in the cost-effectiveness of IM olanzapine versus haloperidol (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio 667.16; 95% confidence interval -770.89, 685.90). CONCLUSIONS: IM midazolam is the dominant cost-effective treatment for the management of acute agitation in the A&E setting. IM olanzapine could be considered as an alternative to IM haloperidol given that there is no clear difference in cost-effectiveness, and their adverse effect profile should be considered when choosing between them.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Methamphetamine is an addictive stimulant that may induce symptoms of agitation and psychosis. The estimated rate of methamphetamine use is 6.6 per 1000 people. Currently, no treatment guidelines exist to support the optimal management of patients presenting with methamphetamine-induced agitation. Emergency department (ED) providers may prescribe various benzodiazepines (BZDs) and antipsychotics (APs) as first-line agents to stabilize these agitated patients. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of a protocol to guide management of this condition. METHODS: This was a retrospective, pre- and poststudy conducted from July 2020 to March 2021 at a large academic medical center. A multidisciplinary protocol was designed to help manage methamphetamine-induced agitation in the ED. The primary outcome of the study was a reduction in the number of BZDs and APs used for the treatment of methamphetamine-induced agitation. This was measured by the incidence of overprescribing, defined as 3 or more APs or BZDs administered within 30 minutes. Secondary outcomes included the use of physical restraints, ED length of stay, and adverse events. RESULTS: We did not observe a significantly lower incidence of overprescribing, adverse events, or ED length of stay when comparing pre- and postprotocol groups. A subgroup analysis demonstrated that when protocol was followed, there was a statistically significant reduction in overprescribing (P = .001). DISCUSSION: We did not find any differences among our primary and secondary outcomes, which may be attributed to protocol nonadherence. Full compliance to the protocol may reduce the rate of overprescribing APs or BZDs in patients with methamphetamine-induced agitation.

RESUMEN

In the emergency department, the diagnosis of an acute psychiatric condition in an elderly patient should only be made after rigorous clinical and paraclinical examinations to rule out any somatic pathology. In addition, the management and treatment of acute agitation must be adapted.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Agitated behaviors are frequently encountered in the prehospital setting and require emergent treatment to prevent harm to patients and prehospital personnel. Chemical sedation with ketamine works faster than traditional pharmacologic agents, though it has a higher incidence of adverse events, including intubation. Outcomes following varying initial doses of prehospital intramuscular (IM) ketamine use have been incompletely described. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether using a lower dose IM ketamine protocol for agitation is associated with more favorable outcomes. METHODS: This study was a pre-/post-intervention retrospective chart review of prehospital care reports (PCRs). Adult patients who received chemical sedation in the form of IM ketamine for agitated behaviors were included. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on the standard IM ketamine dose of 4mg/kg and the lower IM dose of 3mg/kg with the option for an additional 1mg/kg if required. Primary outcomes included intubation and hospital admission. Secondary outcomes included emergency department (ED) length of stay, additional chemical or physical restraints, assaults on prehospital or ED employees, and documented adverse events. RESULTS: The standard dose cohort consisted of 211 patients. The lower dose cohort consisted of 81 patients, 17 of whom received supplemental ketamine administration. Demographics did not significantly differ between the cohorts (mean age 35.14 versus 35.65 years; P = .484; and 67.8% versus 65.4% male; P = .89). Lower dose subjects were administered a lower ketamine dose (mean 3.24mg/kg) compared to the standard dose cohort (mean 3.51mg/kg). There was no statistically significant difference between the cohorts in intubation rate (14.2% versus 18.5%; P = .455), ED length of stay (14.31 versus 14.88 hours; P = .118), need for additional restraint and sedation (P = .787), or admission rate (26.1% versus 25.9%; P = .677). In the lower dose cohort, 41.2% (7/17) of patients who received supplemental ketamine doses were intubated, a higher rate than the patients in this cohort who did not receive supplemental ketamine (8/64, 12.5%; P <.01). CONCLUSION: Access to effective, fast-acting chemical sedation is paramount for prehospital providers. No significant outcomes differences existed when a lower dose IM ketamine protocol was implemented for prehospital chemical sedation. Patients who received a second dose of ketamine had a significant increase in intubation rate. A lower dose protocol may be considered for an agitation protocol to limit the amount of medication administered to a population of high-risk patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Timely use of pharmacological interventions to treat acute agitation has the potential to decrease physical restraint use. The aim of this study is to determine if adherence to standardized pharmacological recommendations for the treatment of acutely agitated pediatric patients decreases physical restraint use. Additionally, this study aims to identify predictors of physical restraint use and describe treatment related adverse events. This is a retrospective chart review of patient visits between September 1, 2016 and August 31, 2017. Patient visits were included if the patient presented to the pediatric emergency department, met ICD-10 codes, and received pharmacologic management or physical restraint to treat acute agitation. The differences in rate of physical restraint was assessed between patients treated according to the standardized pharmacological recommendations and patients who were not. 447 patients were included with a mean age of 13 years. No significant difference in physical restraint use was found when standardized pharmacological recommendations were followed compared to when they were not (P = 0.16). Only presentation on day shift when compared to evening shift resulted in increased odds of being restrained (OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.18, 3.50). Nine adverse events possibly related to medications were identified with none considered to be of significant clinical concern. Standardized pharmacological treatment recommendations was not associated with a decrease in physical restraint use for agitated patients presenting to the pediatric emergency department. The pharmacologic strategies utilized were generally safe and well tolerated in this patient population.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Acute agitation in the pediatric emergency department (ED) has the potential to escalate into aggression and result in harm. Rapid and effective management may be warranted. Use of pro re nata (prn) oral immediate-release (IR) quetiapine, haloperidol, loxapine, and chlorpromazine has been observed in the pediatric ED at Surrey Memorial Hospital to manage this condition; however, evidence for oral prn antipsychotic use is limited in the pediatric population. Objectives: The primary objective is to characterize the dose of prn oral IR quetiapine used to manage acute agitation or aggression in a pediatric ED. Secondary objectives include characterizing the dose of prn oral IR haloperidol, loxapine, and chlorpromazine; and describing the 1-hour response rate, admission rate, length of stay (LOS), and adverse drug effects. Method: The medical records of pediatric patients who received at least one prn oral dose of IR quetiapine, haloperidol, loxapine, or chlorpromazine for acute agitation and aggression, without regard to the etiology of symptom presentation, between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2016, were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Sixty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean dose of quetiapine was 32 mg/dose (0.54 mg/kg per dose); and the response rate was 53%. The mean haloperidol, loxapine, and chlorpromazine doses were 4 mg (0.07 mg/kg per dose), 13 mg (0.19 mg/kg per dose), and 29 mg/dose (0.53 mg/kg per dose) respectively; and the response rates were 36%, 30%, and 50%, respectively. Between 19% and 60% of patients were admitted, majority to the psychiatry ward. The median LOS in the ED was between 5 and 18 hours for nonadmitted patients. Extrapyramidal side effects (EPS) were reported with first-generation antipsychotics (FGA), but not with quetiapine. Conclusion: Quetiapine appears to be a viable agent for managing acute agitation and aggression in the pediatric ED with low rates of EPS. Further studies are encouraged to compare the effectiveness of quetiapine with FGA. A Clinical Trial Registration number is not applicable for this study.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Objective To compare the effects of bilateral and non- bilateral frontal pneumocephalus on acute agitation after craniotomy for brain tumor. Methods The clinical data of 406 brain tumor patients who had underwent craniotomy in Maoming Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital and Guangdong Provincial People′s Hospital from January 2014 to January 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into bilateral frontal pneumocephalus group (92 cases) and unilateral frontal pneumocephalus group (314 cases) according to frontal pneumocephalus within 12 hours after operation. Within 24 hours after operation, the sedation-agitation scale (SAS) was evaluated, and SAS≥ 5 scores was defined as acute agitation. Results The incidence of postoperative acute agitation, rate of postoperative sedatives use and postoperative hospital stay in bilateral frontal pneumocephalus group were significantly higher than those in unilateral frontal pneumocephalus group: 23.9% (22/92) vs. 8.6% (27/314), 14.1% (13/92) vs. 3.5% (11/314) and (12.2 ± 2.6) d vs. (8.5 ± 1.6) d, and there were statistical differences (P＜0.01 or ＜0.05). Conclusions Brain tumor patients who had bilateral frontal pneumocephalus after craniotomy are more likely to develop acute agitation.

RESUMEN

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

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The management of acute agitation in the emergency department often requires the administration of rapid-acting antipsychotic agents. However, there are few comparative studies and little guidance regarding the risks associated with use of such drugs in the acute setting. OBJECTIVE: This structured evidence-based review compared the safety of antipsychotic pharmacotherapies for acute agitation using data from randomized controlled trials identified by a literature search of the PubMed database. RESULTS: Based on findings from 34 blinded, randomized controlled trials, common acute adverse effects of second-generation antipsychotics and haloperidol were headache, dizziness, insomnia, and somnolence. There were some differences in incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), degree of sedation, and acute QTc prolongations between agents. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review demonstrate the improved safety (particularly regarding EPS and over-sedation) of certain newer-generation antipsychotic agents compared with haloperidol and benzodiazepines for the treatment of acutely agitated patients. The risk of prolonged QT interval and torsade de pointes needs to be considered with haloperidol and some of the second-generation antipsychotics.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The main goal of antipsychotic medication in the management of acute agitation in the emergency department is to rapidly induce calm without oversedation, enabling patients to participate in their own care. However, there is a paucity of comparative studies, particularly with newer fast-acting second-generation antipsychotic agents. OBJECTIVE OF THE REVIEW: This structured evidence-based review compared the onset of efficacy of antipsychotic treatments for acute agitation using data from randomized controlled trials identified by a literature search of the PubMed database. RESULTS: Based on findings from 28 blinded randomized controlled trials, onset of efficacy was rapid and generally observed at the first time point after intramuscular administration of ziprasidone (15-30 min) or olanzapine (15-30 min), but was more likely to be delayed with intramuscular haloperidol, even when combined with lorazepam (30-60 min), and intramuscular aripiprazole (45-90 min). When administered orally, rapid onset of efficacy was also consistently observed at the first assessment time point with olanzapine (15-120 min), risperidone (30-120 min), and sublingual asenapine (15 min). Significant effects were apparent for inhaled loxapine within 10-20 min. Effects were apparent within approximately 5-10 min with i.v. droperidol. Onset of efficacy was typically more rapid with second-generation antipsychotic agents than benzodiazepines, but data are limited. CONCLUSIONS: Although the patient populations of trials included in this review do not truly reflect that of the emergency department, the results provide useful information to emergency physicians on the rapid efficacy of certain newer-generation antipsychotic agents for the treatment of acutely agitated patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The objective was to elicit patient preferences for medicine administration method in the management of acute agitation episodes among patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. The patients' experiences of acute agitation episodes and their management of episodes were also explored. Data were collected via an anonymous, internet-based survey of residents in Denmark or Sweden with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder (October 2014 to December 2014). Inclusion criteria were having a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, and being above 18 years of age. The questionnaire included questions about preferences for medication attributes, experiences with pharmacological treatment for agitation and involvement in treatment plans. A total of 237 diagnosed patients (61 with schizophrenia; 176 with bipolar disorder) completed the questionnaire. Agitation episodes were experienced by 90% of the respondents. In total, 83% of the respondents reported having received treatment with tablets. When patients were presented with the attributes of an inhalation method, respondents stated that the fast onset of action, low risk of adverse reactions and least invasive form of drug delivery were positive attributes of treatment with inhalation. Inhalation is a new delivery route for treatment of acute agitation in patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. Inhalation is the preferred treatment method for acute agitation among Danish and Swedish patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Intramuscular (IM) ziprasidone is often used to manage acute agitation. Limited data exist on the pediatric dosing of ziprasidone in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: To characterize the mg/kg dosing differences between pediatric ED patients who respond to an initial dose of ziprasidone versus patients who do not. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study of 5- to 18-year-old patients who were treated with IM ziprasidone in the pediatric ED from 2007 to 2015. Medical records were reviewed to determine demographic and clinical information. Patients were deemed responders to ziprasidone if they required no additional rescue medication for acute agitation within 30 minutes of the initial dose. RESULTS: Forty children received 50 doses of IM ziprasidone. Twenty-seven (68%) patients responded to the initial ziprasidone dose, requiring no further medication intervention for their acute agitation. Responders were given a mean initial dose of 0.19 ± 0.1 mg/kg, while nonresponders were given an initial mean dose of 0.13 ± 0.06 mg/kg ( P = .03). CONCLUSION: A significant dose difference exists between patients who required only one initial dose of ziprasidone compared to those who required additional medication. As a result, an initial dose of 0.2 mg/kg of IM ziprasidone may be considered when managing acutely agitated pediatric patients in the ED.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Acute agitation in the setting of alcohol intoxication is commonly encountered in the Emergency Department (ED). In this setting, expert consensus guidelines recommend haloperidol over second-generation antipsychotics due to their limited safety data in alcohol intoxication. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to compare vital sign changes prior to and after risperidone administration between ED patients presenting with alcohol intoxication [ETOH (+)] and without alcohol intoxication [ETOH (-)]. The secondary objective was to assess the effect of benzodiazepine co-administration with risperidone on vital signs. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of patients who received oral risperidone for acute agitation at two university EDs between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2015. Vital signs (oxygen saturation, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, and respiratory rate) were compared in patients who had ingested alcohol with those who had not. RESULTS: There were 785 patients without evidence of alcohol intoxication who received risperidone in the ED, and 52 patients with alcohol intoxication who received risperidone. Overall, risperidone with and without alcohol intoxication and benzodiazepine administration had no statistically significant effect on vital signs (p = ns for all comparisons). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that oral risperidone may be a safe option for acute agitation in patients presenting to the ED with alcohol intoxication.

Asunto(s)