Literature DB >> 20868907

Randomized controlled trial of intramuscular droperidol versus midazolam for violence and acute behavioral disturbance: the DORM study.

Geoffrey K Isbister1, Leonie A Calver, Colin B Page, Barrie Stokes, Jenni L Bryant, Michael A Downes.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: We determine whether droperidol, midazolam, or the combination is more effective for intramuscular sedation in violent and acute behavioral disturbance in the emergency department (ED).
METHODS: We conducted a blinded randomized controlled trial of intramuscular sedation for violent and acute behavioral disturbance, comparing droperidol (10 mg), midazolam (10 mg), and droperidol (5 mg)/midazolam (5 mg). Inclusion criteria were patients requiring physical restraint and parenteral sedation. The primary outcome was the duration of the violent and acute behavioral disturbance, defined as the time security staff were required. Secondary outcomes included time until additional sedation was administered, staff and patient injuries, further episodes of violent and acute behavioral disturbance, and drug-related adverse effects.
RESULTS: From 223 ED patients with violent and acute behavioral disturbance, 91 patients were included; 33 received droperidol, 29 received midazolam, and 29 received the combination. There was no difference in the median duration of the violent and acute behavioral disturbance: 20 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 11 to 37 min) for droperidol, 24 minutes (IQR 13 to 35 minutes) for midazolam, and 25 minutes (IQR 15 to 38 minutes) for the combination. Additional sedation was required in 11 (33%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 19% to 52%) droperidol patients, 18 (62%; 95% CI 42% to 79%) midazolam patients, and 12 (41%; 95% CI 24% to 61%) in the combination group. The hazard ratio for additional sedation in the midazolam versus droperidol group was 2.31 (95% credible interval 1.01 to 4.71); for the combination versus droperidol, 1.18 (95% credible interval 0.46 to 2.50). Patient and staff injuries and number of further episodes of violent and acute behavioral disturbance did not differ between groups. There were two adverse effects for droperidol (6%; 95% CI 1% to 22%), 8 for midazolam (28%; 95% CI 13% to 47%), and 2 for the combination (7%; 95% CI 1% to 24%). An abnormal QT occurred in 2 of 31 (6%; 95% CI 1% to 23%) droperidol patients, which was not different from the other groups.
CONCLUSION: Intramuscular droperidol and midazolam resulted in a similar duration of violent and acute behavioral disturbance, but more additional sedation was required with midazolam. Midazolam caused more adverse effects because of oversedation, and there was no evidence of QT prolongation associated with droperidol compared with midazolam.
Copyright © 2010 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20868907     DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.05.037

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Emerg Med        ISSN: 0196-0644            Impact factor:   5.721


  19 in total

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

Authors:  Evelien Spelten; Brodie Thomas; Peter F O'Meara; Brian J Maguire; Deirdre FitzGerald; Stephen J Begg
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-04-29

Review 2.  Haloperidol for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation).

Authors:  Edoardo G Ostinelli; Melanie J Brooke-Powney; Xue Li; Clive E Adams
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-07-31

3.  Anticholinergic syndrome induced by toxic plants.

Authors:  Stergios Soulaidopoulos; Emmanouil Sinakos; Despoina Dimopoulou; Christos Vettas; Evangelos Cholongitas; Alexandros Garyfallos
Journal:  World J Emerg Med       Date:  2017

Review 4.  Antiemetic drugs: what to prescribe and when.

Authors:  Akshay Athavale; Tegan Athavale; Darren M Roberts
Journal:  Aust Prescr       Date:  2020-04-01

5.  Population pharmacokinetics of intramuscular droperidol in acutely agitated patients.

Authors:  Lee-Kien Foo; Stephen B Duffull; Leonie Calver; Jennifer Schneider; Geoffrey K Isbister
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 4.335

6.  Comparison of droperidol and haloperidol for use by paramedics: assessment of safety and effectiveness.

Authors:  Marlow Macht; Ashley C Mull; Kevin E McVaney; Emily H Caruso; J Bill Johnston; Joshua B Gaither; Aaron M Shupp; Kevin D Marquez; Jason S Haukoos; Christopher B Colwell
Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 3.077

Review 7.  Pharmacological management of anticholinergic delirium - theory, evidence and practice.

Authors:  Andrew H Dawson; Nicholas A Buckley
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 4.335

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

Authors:  Luis Hernández-Rodríguez; Fernanda Bellolio; Daniel Cabrera; Alicia E Mattson; Derek VanMeter; Andrew E Grush; Lucas Oliveira J E Silva
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 2.469

9.  The psychopharmacology of agitation: consensus statement of the american association for emergency psychiatry project Beta psychopharmacology workgroup.

Authors:  Michael P Wilson; David Pepper; Glenn W Currier; Garland H Holloman; David Feifel
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2012-02

10.  Verbal De-escalation of the Agitated Patient: Consensus Statement of the American Association for Emergency Psychiatry Project BETA De-escalation Workgroup.

Authors:  Janet S Richmond; Jon S Berlin; Avrim B Fishkind; Garland H Holloman; Scott L Zeller; Michael P Wilson; Muhamad Aly Rifai; Anthony T Ng
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2012-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.