Real-World Evidence of Antipsychotic Monotherapy Versus Polypharmacy in the Treatment of Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: It is still not well known whether antipsychotic monotherapy versus polypharmacy differs in terms of efficacy in the emergency department (ED) utilization, presentation with agitation/aggression, and rehospitalization in schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) patients. This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of antipsychotic monotherapy and polypharmacy for these outcomes in the real world. METHODS/PROCEDURES: The study was conducted with electronic health records of 669 SSD patients admitted to the ED. Patients were evaluated in 4 groups according to antipsychotic use at the first admission to ED: antipsychotic noncompliance for more than 90 days, antipsychotic noncompliance for 15 to 90 days, antipsychotic monotherapy, and polypharmacy. All patients followed up for at least 1 year after index admission. The primary outcomes determined an association between antipsychotic monotherapy versus polypharmacy and all-cause psychiatric hospitalization between the groups after index admission in the SSD. FINDINGS/RESULTS: The groups, including patients with antipsychotic noncompliance, had higher ED visits, more hospitalizations, and more admissions with agitation/aggression compared with antipsychotic monotherapy or polypharmacy. However, no differences were found between monotherapy and polypharmacy groups regarding these outcomes. In addition, there was no difference in the risk of hospitalization in monotherapy antipsychotic users compared with polypharmacy users. Patients discharged with monotherapy or polypharmacy also had similar rehospitalization rates at follow-up. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: There is no positive evidence that recommending polypharmacy over antipsychotic monotherapy is superior with regard to the resulting frequency of ED visits, ED admissions with agitation/aggression, hospitalization, and rehospitalization. In this context, antipsychotic monotherapy may be preferred over polypharmacy in patients who are not resistant to treatment.

Emerging therapies for treatment of agitation, psychosis, or apathy in Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Agitation, psychosis, and apathy are prevalent and highly distressing neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) of Alzheimer's disease (AD) that have been linked to numerous negative outcomes, including increased mortality, worsened cognitive decline, and caregiver burden. Current treatments for AD-associated agitation, namely atypical antipsychotics, provide some benefits but may increase the risk of serious adverse events and death. Meanwhile, no pharmacotherapies have been approved by regulatory agencies for the treatment of psychosis or apathy in AD. Over the past decade, many new and repurposed drugs have emerged as potential therapeutic options for managing these challenging NPS. AREAS COVERED: This review aims to provide a comprehensive summary of pharmacotherapies that have recently been investigated in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials for the treatment of agitation, psychosis, or apathy in AD. EXPERT OPINION: Novel atypical antipsychotics, serotonergic antidepressants, cannabinoids, and dextromethorphan combination drugs have shown promising results for alleviating agitation. Pimavanserin appears to be the most effective emerging therapy for psychosis, while methylphenidate has demonstrated good efficacy for apathy. Further research on biomarkers of NPS severity and treatment response, as well as continued improvements in methodological approaches are needed to advance the field.

Dexmedetomidine Sublingual Film: A New Treatment to Reduce Agitation in Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to review the available literature for dexmedetomidine sublingual film use in the treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia and bipolar disorders. DATA SOURCES: A literature search of PubMed (January 2017-March 2023) and EMBASE (January 2017-March 2023) was performed using the terms: Igalmi, dexmedetomidine, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and agitation. Additional information sources include ClinicalTrials.gov, scientific posters, and articles identified through review of references from clinical trials publications. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Relevant English-language articles conducted in humans were considered, with a preference for phase 3 clinical trials. Trial analyses and articles discussing pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety were also evaluated. DATA SYNTHESIS: Dexmedetomidine sublingual film was evaluated for use in schizophrenia in the SERENITY 1 pivotal trial and for bipolar disorders in the SERENITY 2 pivotal trial. Both studies found treatment of mild to moderate agitation with dexmedetomidine sublingual film 180 and 120 µg to be superior to placebo in reducing the severity of agitation. Treatment effect was seen as early as 20 minutes. Somnolence was the most common adverse effect in both studies. Cardiovascular adverse effects were mild and transient in most cases. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: Dexmedetomidine sublingual film is a new and novel treatment for agitation and gives clinicians an alternative to antipsychotic and benzodiazepine use. It has advantageous properties including its noninvasive route of administration, fast absorption, and rapid onset of effect. Cost may limit its use. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine sublingual film provides an alternative approach to treatment of acute agitation in adults with schizophrenia and bipolar disorders based on both mechanism of action and route of administration.

Efficacy and safety of brexpiprazole for the treatment of agitation in Alzheimer's disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown a benefit of brexpiprazole in managing agitation in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, its efficacy and safety remain unclear. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for RCTs comparing brexpiprazole with placebo in patients with agitation and AD. Three studies comprising 1,048 patients were included. In patients with agitation and AD, brexpiprazole significantly improved the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory total score (CMAI) at any dose (MD -3.05; 95% CI -5.12, -0.98; p < 0.01; I2 = 19%) and at 2 mg (MD -4.36; 95% CI -7.02, -1.70; p < 0.01; I2 = 0%) over 12 weeks. Brexpiprazole at any dose and 2 mg also showed benefit in the Clinical Global Impression - Severity of illness (CGI-S) score as related to agitation over 12 weeks (MD -0.20; 95% CI -0.36, -0.05; p < 0.01; I2 = 35%). There is no significant difference between the groups in the incidence of at least one treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.95, 1.37; p = 0.16; I2 = 45%) and all-cause mortality (RR 1.99; 95% CI 0.37, 10.84; p = 0.42; I2 = 0%). Brexpiprazole at any dose significantly increased the Simpson-Angus Scale (SAS; MD 0.47; 95% CI 0.28, 0.66; p < 0.01). Our results suggest that brexpiprazole is more efficacious than placebo in the treatment of agitation in AD patients. Further studies are still necessary to confirm long-term effects of brexpiprazole.Prospero registry: CRD42023486694.

Fixed dose ketamine for prehospital management of hyperactive delirium with severe agitation.

INTRODUCTION: Patients exhibiting signs of hyperactive delirium with severe agitation (HDSA) may require sedating medications for stabilization and safe transport to the hospital. Determining the patient's weight and calculating the correct weight-based dose may be challenging in an emergency. A fixed dose ketamine protocol is an alternative to the traditional weight-based administration, which may also reduce dosing errors. The objective of this study was to evaluate the frequency and characteristics of adverse events following pre-hospital ketamine administration for HDSA. METHODS: Emergency Medical Services (EMS) records from four agencies were searched for prehospital ketamine administration. Cases were included if a 250 mg dose of ketamine was administered on standing order to an adult patient for clinical signs consistent with HDSA. Protocols allowed for a second 250 mg dose of ketamine if the first dose was not effective. Both the 250 mg initial dose and the total prehospital dose were analyzed for weight based dosing and adverse events. RESULTS: Review of 132 cases revealed 60 cases that met inclusion criteria. Patients' median weight was 80 kg (range: 50-176 kg). No patients were intubated by EMS, one only requiring suction, three required respiratory support via bag valve mask (BVM). Six (10%) patients were intubated in the emergency department (ED) including the three (5%) supported by EMS via BVM, three (5%) others who were sedated further in the ED prior to requiring intubation. All six patients who were intubated were discharged from the hospital with a Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1 score. The weight-based dosing equivalent for the 250 mg initial dose (OR: 2.62, CI: 0.67-10.22) and the total prehospital dose, inclusive of the 12 patients that were administered a second dose, (OR: 0.74, CI: 0.27, 2.03), were not associated with the need for intubation. CONCLUSION: The 250 mg fixed dose of ketamine was not >5 mg/kg weight-based dose equivalent for all patients in this study. Although a second 250 mg dose of ketamine was permitted under standing orders, only 12 (20%) of the patients were administered a second dose, none experienced an adverse event. This indicates that the 250 mg initial dose was effective for 80% of the patients. Four patients with prehospital adverse events likely related to the administration of ketamine were found. One required suction, three (5%) requiring BVM respiratory support by EMS were subsequently intubated upon arrival in the ED. All 60 patients were discharged from the hospital alive. Further research is needed to determine an optimal single administration dose for ketamine in patients exhibiting signs of HDSA, if employing a standardized fixed dose medication protocol streamlines administration, and if the fixed dose medication reduces the occurrence of dosage errors.

Fewer emergency department alarms is associated with reduced use of medications for acute agitation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient monitoring systems provide critical information but often produce loud, frequent alarms that worsen patient agitation and stress. This may increase the use of physical and chemical restraints with implications for patient morbidity and autonomy. This study analyzes how augmenting alarm thresholds affects the proportion of alarm-free time and the frequency of medications administered to treat acute agitation. METHODS: Our emergency department's patient monitoring system was modified on June 28, 2022 to increase the tachycardia alarm threshold from 130 to 150 and to remove alarm sounds for several arrhythmias, including bigeminy and premature ventricular beats. A pre-post study was performed lasting 55 days before and 55 days after this intervention. The primary outcome was change in number of daily patient alarms. The secondary outcomes were alarm-free time per day and median number of antipsychotic and benzodiazepine medications administered per day. The safety outcome was the median number of patients transferred daily to the resuscitation area. We used quantile regression to compare outcomes between the pre- and post-intervention period and linear regression to correlate alarm-free time with the number of sedating medications administered. RESULTS: Between the pre- and post-intervention period, the median number of alarms per day decreased from 1332 to 845 (-37%). This was primarily driven by reduced low-priority arrhythmia alarms from 262 to 21 (-92%), while the median daily census was unchanged (33 vs 32). Median hours per day free from alarms increased from 1.0 to 2.4 (difference 1.4, 95% CI 0.8-2.1). The median number of sedating medications administered per day decreased from 14 to 10 (difference - 4, 95% CI -1 to -7) while the number of escalations in level of care to our resuscitation care area did not change significantly. Multivariable linear regression showed a 60-min increase of alarm-free time per day was associated with 0.8 (95% CI 0.1-1.4) fewer administrations of sedating medication while an additional patient on the behavioral health census was associated with 0.5 (95% CI 0.0-1.1) more administrations of sedating medication. CONCLUSION: A reasonable change in alarm parameter settings may increase the time patients and healthcare workers spend in the emergency department without alarm noise, which in this study was associated with fewer doses of sedating medications administered.

Clinical Pipelines for Alzheimer's Disease Psychosis and Agitation.

Agitation and psychosis are key behavioral and psychological symptoms of Alzheimer's disease (AD). For family and caregivers of patients, such symptoms are critical factors of distress and increased burden, but medication to treat them is limited. In most cases, drugs for other neuropsychiatric diseases have been used to manage these symptoms in an off-label manner. Due to the complex pathological background of AD and limited clinical data, obtaining proof of concept for the treatment of these symptoms is challenging. However, in 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved brexpiprazole as the first and only drug to treat agitation in AD. Several other compounds have been evaluated in clinical situations. This review highlights recent pipelines being developed for agitation and psychosis for patients living with AD.

Impact of the iWHELD digital person-centered care program on quality of life, agitation and psychotropic medications in people with dementia living in nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: iWHELD is a digital person-centered care program for people with dementia in nursing homes adapted for remote delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A 16-week two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial in 149 UK nursing homes compared iWHELD with treatment as usual (TAU). Primary outcome was the overall quality of life with secondary outcomes of agitation and psychotropic use. RESULTS: iWHELD conferred benefit to quality of life on the primary (F = 4.3, p = 0.04) and secondary measures of quality of life (F = 6.45, p = 0.01) and reduced psychotropic medication use (χ2  = 4.08, p = 0.04) with no worsening of agitation. Benefit was seen in participants who contracted COVID-19, those with agitation at baseline, and those taking psychotropic medications. DISCUSSION: iWHELD confers benefits to quality of life and key measures of well-being, can be delivered during the challenging conditions of a pandemic, and should be considered for use alongside any emerging pharmacological treatment for neuropsychiatric symptoms. HIGHLIGHTS: iWHELD is the only remote, digital delivery nursing home training programme for dementia care iWHELD improved quality of life in people with dementia and reduced antipsychotic use without worsening of agitation Residents who contracted Covid-19 during the study also experienced benefits from iWHELD iWHELD offers a valuable, pandemic-safe tool for improving dementia care.

Can ketamine administration prevent intubation in patients who cannot comply with NIV due to agitation?

BACKGROUND: In patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute respiratory failure, non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) is applied when conventional oxygen support is not sufficient. Patients who are agitated often have very low NIMV compliance and a transition to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is often required. To avoid IMV, a suitable sedative agent can be utilized. The aim of this research is to investigate the relationship between ketamine administration to patients who are non-compliant with NIMV due to agitation and the outcome of their intubation. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with acute respiratory failure who were admitted to the ED from 2021 to 2022 and used Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) to identify agitation level of patients. The relationship between ketamine administration in this patient group and NIMV compliance and intubation rate was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients, including 35 (43.2%) men and 46 (56.8%) women, were included in the study. Of these patients, 46 (56.8%) were intubated despite ketamine administration, while 35 (43.2%) were compliant with NIMV and were not intubated. When evaluating the RASS, which shows the agitation levels of the patients, the non-intubated group was found to be 2.17 ± 0.68, while the intubated group was 2.66 ± 0.73, and it was statistically significant that the NIMV intubated group was higher (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: This study showed that agitation can impair NIMV compliance in patients with acute respiratory failure. However, a significant proportion of this patient group can be avoided through IMV with proper sedative agents.

Optimal Injectable Haloperidol Dose Assessment in the Older Hospitalized Inpatient.

BACKGROUND: Haloperidol can be used off-label for agitation and/or delirium in older individuals. The recommended initial intramuscular or intravenous dose is 0.5 to 1 mg. However, the evidence to support these doses is nominal. OBJECTIVES: The primary outcome was to determine whether low-dose injectable haloperidol (≤0.5 mg) was similar in effect to higher doses by assessing the need for repeat doses within 4 hours as a surrogate marker. Secondary outcomes include comparison of length of stay, utilization of restraints, and discharge outcomes between dosage groups. METHODS: This was a retrospective, single-center, cohort study. Patients aged ≥65 years who received haloperidol injectable who were not on antipsychotics prior to admission were reviewed. RESULTS: In the low-dose group (n = 15), no patients required additional haloperidol doses within 4 hours compared with 1 patient each in the medium-dose (n = 23) and high-dose (n = 19) groups (P = 0.94). There was a difference regarding length of stay, utilization of restraints, and discharge to facility when admitted from home favoring low-dose haloperidol. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: While limited by sample size and retrospective design, patients who received low-dose haloperidol demonstrated similar efficacy to those who received higher doses of haloperidol. In addition, secondary outcomes mentioned above favored the use of low-dose haloperidol as well. Based on these findings, low-dose haloperidol is a reasonable initial dose for the agitated older patient.

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.

A case of Pitt-Hopkins syndrome: psychopharmacological approach for anxiety, insomnia, and agitation.

Pitt-Hopkins syndrome (PTHS) is a rare genetic disorder resulting from TCF4 gene mutations which is characterized by dysmorphic facial features, psychomotor delay, intellectual disability, breathing anomalies, and seizures. Psychiatric conditions are occasionally seen. We present the case report of a seven-year-old PTHS patient with anxiety, insomnia, and agitation. We discuss the psychopharmacological intervention options for this patient. The present case study reports on a 7-year-old female with PTHS, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and intellectual disability. She had insomnia, crying spells and agitation complaints. For anxiety symptoms and agitation, risperidone, fluoxetine, and clonazepam treatment were given by the neurologist which caused behavioral disinhibition, paroxysmal agitation and no benefit. After admission to our hospital, aripiprazole and hydroxyzine were prescribed for anxiety and ASD-related irritability. She showed a minimal improvement but hyperventilation attacks were still ongoing. Hydroxyzine was stopped, and quetiapine was given to eliminate sleep disturbance. Her sleep period went up to eleven hours. For the anxiety symptoms, escitalopram was prescribed. She showed improvements in sleep, diminished hyperactivity and decreased frequency of abnormal breathing spells. Also, enhancement of social communication skills like increased eye contact and response to her name was observed. Patients with genetic syndromes may have various psychiatric complaints. Psychopharmacological interventions should be administered carefully for the side effects.

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.

Safety and effectiveness of benzodiazepines and antipsychotics for agitation in older adults in the emergency department.

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.

Comparison of efficacy and frequency of akathisia and dystonia between olanzapine, metoclopramide and prochlorperazine in ED headache patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and frequency of akathisia and dystonia between the dopamine antagonist headache medications olanzapine, metoclopramide and prochlorperazine. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study of patients presenting to a large urban level one trauma center between 2010 and 2018. Inclusion criteria was age ≥ 18 who presented to the emergency department with a chief complaint of headache who received either olanzapine, metoclopramide or prochlorperazine. The primary outcome was need for rescue medication. Secondary outcomes were receiving medication for either akathisia or dystonia. Logistic regression was used to identify differences between the three cohorts up to 72 h from initial presentation. RESULTS: There were 5643 patients who met inclusion criteria. Olanzapine was the most commonly used drug (n = 2994, 53%) followed by prochlorperazine (n = 2100, 37%) and metoclopramide (n = 549, 10%). After adjusting for age and gender, there were no differences in risk for receiving rescue therapy or developing akathisia or dystonia. CONCLUSION: During initial ED visit and up to 72 h after receiving olanzapine, metoclopramide or prochlorperazine, we found no difference in risk for requiring rescue medication or developing akathisia or dystonia.

Dexmedetomidine versus haloperidol for sedation of non-intubated patients with hyperactive delirium during the night in a high dependency unit: study protocol for an open-label, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial (DEX-HD trial).

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common in critically ill patients. Haloperidol has long been used for the treatment of delirium. Dexmedetomidine has recently been used to treat delirium among intubated critically ill patients. However, the efficacy of dexmedetomidine for delirium in non-intubated critically ill patients remains unknown. We hypothesize that dexmedetomidine is superior to haloperidol for sedation of patients with hyperactive delirium, and would reduce the prevalence of delirium among non-intubated patients after administration. We will conduct a randomized controlled trial to compare dexmedetomidine and haloperidol for the treatment of nocturnal hyperactive delirium in non-intubated patients in high dependency units (HDUs). METHODS: This is an open-label, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and haloperidol for nocturnal hyperactive delirium in non-intubated patients at two HDUs of a tertiary hospital. We will recruit consecutive non-intubated patients who are admitted to the HDU from the emergency room, and allocate them in a 1:1 ratio to the dexmedetomidine or haloperidol group in advance. The allocated investigational drug will be administered only when participants develop hyperactive delirium (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale [RASS] score ≥1 and a positive score on the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU between 19:00 and 6:00 the next day) during the night at an HDU. Dexmedetomidine is administered continuously, while haloperidol is administered intermittently. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants who achieve the targeted sedation level (RASS score of between -3 and 0) 2h after the administration of the investigational drug. Secondary outcomes include the sedation level and prevalence of delirium on the day following the administration of the investigational drugs, and safety. We plan to enroll 100 participants who develop nocturnal hyperactive delirium and receive one of the two investigational drugs. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and haloperidol for sedation of non-intubated critically ill patients with hyperactive delirium in HDUs. The results of this study may confirm whether dexmedetomidine could be another option to sedate patients with hyperactive delirium. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials, jRCT1051220015, registered on 21 April 2022.

"Mãos de Conforto" (Hands of Comfort): A novel non-pharmacological intervention to ease agitation in elderly persons with dementia.

Behavioral symptoms associated with dementia, such as agitation, are frequent and associated with well-known negative consequences for patients, their carers, and their environment. Pharmacological treatments for agitation using sedatives and antipsychotics are known to have several undesirable side effects and modest efficacy. Non-pharmacological alternatives are recommended as first-line options for agitation in persons with dementia with few side effects, but there is limited evidence of efficacy. We developed a novel and simple non-pharmacological alternative for agitation in dementia residents based on a Brazilian intervention using warm water surgical gloves used in patients with COVID-19 in intensive care units during the pandemic. We coined it "Mãos de Conforto" - Hands of Comfort. We report a series of 7 cases in 3 residents with dementia who whore Hands of Comfort.

Pharmacologic Therapy to Mitigate Acute Agitation in the Emergency Department: Case Reports of Diverse Patient Presentations.

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.

Study of mirtazapine for agitated behaviours in dementia (SYMBAD): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Agitation is common in people with dementia and negatively affects the quality of life of both people with dementia and carers. Non-drug patient-centred care is the first-line treatment, but there is a need for other treatment when this care is not effective. Current evidence is sparse on safer and effective alternatives to antipsychotics. We assessed the efficacy and safety of mirtazapine, an antidepressant prescribed for agitation in dementia. METHODS: This parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial-the Study of Mirtazapine for Agitated Behaviours in Dementia trial (SYMBAD)-was done in 26 UK centres. Participants had probable or possible Alzheimer's disease, agitation unresponsive to non-drug treatment, and a Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) score of 45 or more. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either mirtazapine (titrated to 45 mg) or placebo. The primary outcome was reduction in CMAI score at 12 weeks. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03031184, and ISRCTN17411897. FINDINGS: Between Jan 26, 2017, and March 6, 2020, 204 participants were recruited and randomised. Mean CMAI scores at 12 weeks were not significantly different between participants receiving mirtazapine and participants receiving placebo (adjusted mean difference -1·74, 95% CI -7·17 to 3·69; p=0·53). The number of controls with adverse events (65 [64%] of 102 controls) was similar to that in the mirtazapine group (67 [66%] of 102 participants receiving mirtazapine). However, there were more deaths in the mirtazapine group (n=7) by week 16 than in the control group (n=1), with post-hoc analysis suggesting this difference was of marginal statistical significance (p=0·065). INTERPRETATION: This trial found no benefit of mirtazapine compared with placebo, and we observed a potentially higher mortality with use of mirtazapine. The data from this study do not support using mirtazapine as a treatment for agitation in dementia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Effectiveness and Tolerability of Lurasidone for Bipolar Types I and II and Other Specified Bipolar Depression: A 12-Week Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: There are few guidelines on the management of depressive episodes in patients with bipolar type II (BDII) and related disorders (other specified bipolar and related disorders [OSBD]). Lurasidone is a potential option for treating depressive episodes in BDII/OSBD. This retrospective chart review study aimed to examine the effectiveness and tolerability of lurasidone for use in patients with bipolar depression. METHODS: We reviewed 66 consecutive outpatients with bipolar depression who were prescribed lurasidone between June 2020 and January 2021 and examined 12-week outcomes. Fourteen patients were diagnosed with BDI, and 52 patients were diagnosed with BDII/OSBD (42 BDII and 10 OSBD). Depressive symptoms were evaluated by the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Self-Report (QIDS-SR) at baseline and 2, 4, and 12 weeks. Tolerability was assessed throughout the study period by the incidence of adverse events, such as akathisia, nausea, and manic/hypomanic switch, as well as the lurasidone dropout rate due to adverse events. RESULTS: The total QIDS-SR score at 2 ( P < 0.001), 4 ( P < 0.001), and 12 weeks ( P < 0.001) was significantly lower than that measured at baseline. Remission rate during study period was 29.1%. Of the 66 participants, 47 (71.2%) continued taking lurasidone and 27 (40.9%) and 16 (24.2%) reported adverse events and akathisia, respectively. No significant difference in total QIDS-SR score, dropout rate due to adverse events, rate of adverse events, or rate of akathisia was found between the BDII/OSBD and BDI groups. IMPLICATIONS: Lurasidone is tolerated and could be effective for managing depressive episodes in patients with BDII/OSBD and BDI.