Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Efficacy of Combination Haloperidol, Lorazepam, and Diphenhydramine vs. Combination Haloperidol and Lorazepam in the Treatment of Acute Agitation: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.
Jeffers, Trevor; Darling, Brenna; Edwards, Christopher; Vadiei, Nina.
Afiliação
  • Jeffers T; Department of Pharmacy, Banner - University Medical Center South, Tucson, Arizona.
  • Darling B; Department of Pharmacy, Banner - University Medical Center Tucson, Tucson, Arizona.
  • Edwards C; Department of Pharmacy, Banner - University Medical Center Tucson, Tucson, Arizona; Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, Arizona; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, Arizona.
  • Vadiei N; Department of Pharmacy, Banner - University Medical Center South, Tucson, Arizona; Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, Arizona; Department of Psychiatry, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ.
J Emerg Med ; 62(4): 516-523, 2022 04.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35287982
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Antipsychotic and sedative combinations are commonly used for treating agitation in the emergency department despite limited evidence regarding their comparative safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES:

To compare the efficacy and safety of combination haloperidol, lorazepam, and diphenhydramine (B52) to combination haloperidol and lorazepam (52) in treating acute agitation.

METHODS:

This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included adult patients ≥ 18 years of age who received either B52 or 52 at a Banner Health facility between August 2017 and September 2020. Patients were excluded if they had a pre-existing movement disorder or were withdrawing from alcohol. The primary outcome was administration of additional agitation medication(s) within 2 h of B52 or 52. Secondary outcomes included incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms, length of stay, and additional safety measures.

RESULTS:

There was no difference in administration frequency of additional agitation medication(s) (B52 n = 28 [14%] vs. 52 n = 40 [20%]; p = 0.11). Patients who received 52 were more likely to require an antimuscarinic medication within 2 days (15 vs. 6 patients, p = 0.04). Of the patients who received an antimuscarinic medication, none had documented extrapyramidal symptoms. The 52 group had shorter length of stay (13.8 vs. 17 h; p = 0.03), lower incidence of hypotension (7 vs. 32 patients; p < 0.001), and oxygen desaturation (0 vs. 6 patients; p = 0.01), and fewer physical restraints (53 vs. 86 patients; p = 0.001) compared with the B52 group.

CONCLUSIONS:

Both the B52 and 52 combinations infrequently required repeat agitation medication; however, the B52 combination resulted in more oxygen desaturation, hypotension, physical restraint use, and longer length of stay.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Antipsicóticos / Hipotensão Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Emerg Med Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Antipsicóticos / Hipotensão Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Emerg Med Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article