Gillies Donna, Sampson Stephanie, Beck Alison, Rathbone John
Western Sydney and Nepean BlueMountains Local HealthDistricts -MentalHealth, Parramatta, Australia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Apr 30(4):CD003079. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003079.pub3.
Acute psychotic illness, especially when associated with agitated or violent behaviour, can require urgent pharmacological tranquillisation or sedation. In several countries, clinicians often use benzodiazepines (either alone or in combination with antipsychotics) for this outcome.
To estimate the effects of benzodiazepines, alone or in combination with antipsychotics, when compared with placebo or antipsychotics, alone or in combination with antihistamines, to control disturbed behaviour and reduce psychotic symptoms.
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register (January 2012), inspected reference lists of included and excluded studies and contacted authors of relevant studies.
We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing benzodiazepines alone or in combination with any antipsychotics, versus antipsychotics alone or in combination with any other antipsychotics, benzodiazepines or antihistamines, for people with acute psychotic illnesses.
We reliably selected studies, quality assessed them and extracted data. For binary outcomes, we calculated standard estimates of relative risk (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a fixed-effect model. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) between groups. If heterogeneity was identified, this was explored using a random-effects model.
We included 21 trials with a total of n = 1968 participants. There was no significant difference for most outcomes in the one trial that compared benzodiazepines with placebo, although there was a higher risk of no improvement in people receiving placebo in the medium term (one to 48 hours) (n = 102, 1 RCT, RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.97, very low quality evidence). There was no difference in the number of participants who had not improved in the medium term when benzodiazepines were compared with antipsychotics (n = 308, 5 RCTs, RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.42, low quality evidence); however, people receiving benzodiazepines were less likely to experience extrapyramidal effects (EPS) in the medium term (n = 536, 8 RCTs, RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.39, moderate quality of evidence). Data comparing combined benzodiazepines and antipsychotics versus benzodiazepines alone did not yield any significant results. When comparing combined benzodiazepines/antipsychotics (all studies compared haloperidol) with the same antipsychotics alone (haloperidol), there was no difference between groups in improvement in the medium term (n = 155, 3 RCTs, RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.70, very low quality evidence) but sedation was more likely in people who received the combination therapy (n = 172, 3 RCTs, RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.67, very low quality evidence). However, more participants receiving combined benzodiazepines and haloperidol had not improved by medium term when compared to participants receiving olanzapine (n = 60,1 RCT, RR 25.00, 95% CI 1.55 to 403.99, very low quality evidence) or ziprasidone (n = 60, 1 RCT, RR 4.00, 95% CI 1.25 to 12.75 very low quality evidence). When haloperidol and midazolam were compared with olanzapine, there was some evidence the combination was superior in terms of improvement, sedation and behaviour.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from trials for the use of benzodiazepines alone is not good. There were relatively little good data and most trials are too small to highlight differences in either positive or negative effects. Adding a benzodiazepine to other drugs does not seem to confer clear advantage and has potential for adding unnecessary adverse effects. Sole use of older antipsychotics unaccompanied by anticholinergic drugs seems difficult to justify. Much more high quality research is needed in this area.
急性精神病性疾病,尤其是伴有激越或暴力行为时,可能需要紧急药物镇静。在多个国家,临床医生常使用苯二氮䓬类药物(单独使用或与抗精神病药物联用)来达到这一目的。
评估苯二氮䓬类药物单独使用或与抗精神病药物联用,与安慰剂、单独使用抗精神病药物、单独使用抗精神病药物与抗组胺药联用相比,在控制行为紊乱和减轻精神病性症状方面的效果。
我们检索了Cochrane精神分裂症研究组的注册库(2012年1月),查阅了纳入和排除研究的参考文献列表,并联系了相关研究的作者。
我们纳入了所有比较单独使用苯二氮䓬类药物或与任何抗精神病药物联用,与单独使用抗精神病药物或与任何其他抗精神病药物、苯二氮䓬类药物或抗组胺药联用,用于急性精神病性疾病患者的随机临床试验(RCT)。
我们可靠地选择研究,对其进行质量评估并提取数据。对于二分结局,我们使用固定效应模型计算相对危险度(RR)的标准估计值及其95%置信区间(CI)。对于连续性结局,我们计算组间均值差(MD)。如果发现异质性,则使用随机效应模型进行探讨。
我们纳入了21项试验,共1968名参与者。在一项比较苯二氮䓬类药物与安慰剂的试验中,大多数结局无显著差异,尽管在中期(1至48小时)接受安慰剂的患者无改善的风险更高(n = 102,1项RCT,RR 0.62,95%CI 0.40至0.97,极低质量证据)。比较苯二氮䓬类药物与抗精神病药物时,中期无改善的参与者数量无差异(n = 308,5项RCT,RR 1.10,95%CI 0.85至1.42,低质量证据);然而,接受苯二氮䓬类药物的患者在中期发生锥体外系反应(EPS)的可能性较小(n = 536,8项RCT,RR 0.15,95%CI 0.06至0.39,中等质量证据)。比较苯二氮䓬类药物与抗精神病药物联用与单独使用苯二氮䓬类药物的数据未得出任何显著结果。比较苯二氮䓬类药物/抗精神病药物联用(所有研究均比较氟哌啶醇)与单独使用相同抗精神病药物(氟哌啶醇)时,中期改善情况两组间无差异(n = 155,3项RCT,RR 1.27,95%CI 0.94至1.70,极低质量证据),但接受联合治疗的患者更易出现镇静作用(n = 172,3项RCT,RR 1.75,95%CI 1.14至2.67,极低质量证据)。然而,与接受奥氮平(n = 60,1项RCT,RR 25.00,95%CI 1.55至403.99,极低质量证据)或齐拉西酮(n = 60,1项RCT,RR 4.00,95%CI 1.25至12.75,极低质量证据)的参与者相比,接受苯二氮䓬类药物与氟哌啶醇联用的更多参与者在中期无改善。比较氟哌啶醇和咪达唑仑与奥氮平时,有一些证据表明联合用药在改善、镇静和行为方面更具优势。
单独使用苯二氮䓬类药物的试验证据不足。高质量数据相对较少,大多数试验规模太小,无法凸显积极或消极影响的差异。在其他药物中添加苯二氮䓬类药物似乎并无明显优势,且有可能增加不必要的不良反应。单独使用未联用抗胆碱能药物的 older抗精神病药物似乎难以证明其合理性。该领域需要更多高质量研究。