Cargando…

Comparison of haloperidol and midazolam in restless management of patients referred to the Emergency Department: A double-blinded, randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Restless and violent behaviors are common in Emergency Departments (EDs), which need therapeutic interventions in most of the times. The first-generation anti-psychotic drugs are one of the most applicable therapeutic agents in the management of such patients, but their use has some limi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Esmailian, Mehrdad, Ahmadi, Omid, Taheri, Mehrsa, Zamani, Majid
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4696368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26759570
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-1995.170598
_version_ 1782407787632918528
author Esmailian, Mehrdad
Ahmadi, Omid
Taheri, Mehrsa
Zamani, Majid
author_facet Esmailian, Mehrdad
Ahmadi, Omid
Taheri, Mehrsa
Zamani, Majid
author_sort Esmailian, Mehrdad
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Restless and violent behaviors are common in Emergency Departments (EDs), which need therapeutic interventions in most of the times. The first-generation anti-psychotic drugs are one of the most applicable therapeutic agents in the management of such patients, but their use has some limitations. Some studies suggest midazolam as an alternative medicine. Therefore, this study was performed with the aim of comparison of the efficacy and safety of haloperidol and midazolam in the restless management of referring patients to EDs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present double-blinded trial was done on patients needed sedation and referred to the ED of Alzahra Hospital, Isfahan, Iran, in 2014. The patients were categorized into two random groups of haloperidol (5 mg) and midazolam receivers (2.5 mg for those weighing <50 kg and 5 mg in >50 kg), as intramuscular administration. The time to achieve sedation, need for rescue dose, need to resedation within the first 60 min, and adverse effects of drugs were compared among the groups. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were entered to the study. The mean age in the haloperidol and midazolam groups was 44.8 ± 4.1 years and 45.5 ± 4.7 years, respectively (P = 0.91). The mean time of sedation in the haloperidol and midazolam groups was 5.6 ± 0.3 min and 5.2 ± 0.1 min, respectively (P = 0.31). The mean time of full consciousness after sedation was 36.2 ± 4.5 min and 38.2 ± 3.4 min in the haloperidol and midazolam groups, respectively (P = 0.72). On average, time to arousal in the midazolam group was 10.33 min more than the haloperidol group, but it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study show that administration of midazolam and haloperidol have similar efficacy in the treatment of restless symptoms with the same recovery time from drug effects for referring patients to the ED. In addition, none of the adverse effects were observed in this study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4696368
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46963682016-01-12 Comparison of haloperidol and midazolam in restless management of patients referred to the Emergency Department: A double-blinded, randomized clinical trial Esmailian, Mehrdad Ahmadi, Omid Taheri, Mehrsa Zamani, Majid J Res Med Sci Original Article BACKGROUND: Restless and violent behaviors are common in Emergency Departments (EDs), which need therapeutic interventions in most of the times. The first-generation anti-psychotic drugs are one of the most applicable therapeutic agents in the management of such patients, but their use has some limitations. Some studies suggest midazolam as an alternative medicine. Therefore, this study was performed with the aim of comparison of the efficacy and safety of haloperidol and midazolam in the restless management of referring patients to EDs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present double-blinded trial was done on patients needed sedation and referred to the ED of Alzahra Hospital, Isfahan, Iran, in 2014. The patients were categorized into two random groups of haloperidol (5 mg) and midazolam receivers (2.5 mg for those weighing <50 kg and 5 mg in >50 kg), as intramuscular administration. The time to achieve sedation, need for rescue dose, need to resedation within the first 60 min, and adverse effects of drugs were compared among the groups. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were entered to the study. The mean age in the haloperidol and midazolam groups was 44.8 ± 4.1 years and 45.5 ± 4.7 years, respectively (P = 0.91). The mean time of sedation in the haloperidol and midazolam groups was 5.6 ± 0.3 min and 5.2 ± 0.1 min, respectively (P = 0.31). The mean time of full consciousness after sedation was 36.2 ± 4.5 min and 38.2 ± 3.4 min in the haloperidol and midazolam groups, respectively (P = 0.72). On average, time to arousal in the midazolam group was 10.33 min more than the haloperidol group, but it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study show that administration of midazolam and haloperidol have similar efficacy in the treatment of restless symptoms with the same recovery time from drug effects for referring patients to the ED. In addition, none of the adverse effects were observed in this study. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4696368/ /pubmed/26759570 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-1995.170598 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Journal of Research in Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Esmailian, Mehrdad
Ahmadi, Omid
Taheri, Mehrsa
Zamani, Majid
Comparison of haloperidol and midazolam in restless management of patients referred to the Emergency Department: A double-blinded, randomized clinical trial
title Comparison of haloperidol and midazolam in restless management of patients referred to the Emergency Department: A double-blinded, randomized clinical trial
title_full Comparison of haloperidol and midazolam in restless management of patients referred to the Emergency Department: A double-blinded, randomized clinical trial
title_fullStr Comparison of haloperidol and midazolam in restless management of patients referred to the Emergency Department: A double-blinded, randomized clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of haloperidol and midazolam in restless management of patients referred to the Emergency Department: A double-blinded, randomized clinical trial
title_short Comparison of haloperidol and midazolam in restless management of patients referred to the Emergency Department: A double-blinded, randomized clinical trial
title_sort comparison of haloperidol and midazolam in restless management of patients referred to the emergency department: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4696368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26759570
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-1995.170598
work_keys_str_mv AT esmailianmehrdad comparisonofhaloperidolandmidazolaminrestlessmanagementofpatientsreferredtotheemergencydepartmentadoubleblindedrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT ahmadiomid comparisonofhaloperidolandmidazolaminrestlessmanagementofpatientsreferredtotheemergencydepartmentadoubleblindedrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT taherimehrsa comparisonofhaloperidolandmidazolaminrestlessmanagementofpatientsreferredtotheemergencydepartmentadoubleblindedrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT zamanimajid comparisonofhaloperidolandmidazolaminrestlessmanagementofpatientsreferredtotheemergencydepartmentadoubleblindedrandomizedclinicaltrial