Al-Qadheeb Nada S, Skrobik Yoanna, Schumaker Greg, Pacheco Manuel N, Roberts Russel J, Ruthazer Robin R, Devlin John W
1School of Pharmacy, Northeastern University, Boston, MA.2Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.3Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA.4Department of Psychiatry, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA.5Department of Pharmacy, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA.6Research Design Center and Biostatistics Research Center, Tufts Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA.
Crit Care Med. 2016 Mar;44(3):583-91. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001411.
To compare the efficacy and safety of scheduled low-dose haloperidol versus placebo for the prevention of delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist ≥ 4) administered to critically ill adults with subsyndromal delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist = 1-3).
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Three 10-bed ICUs (two medical and one surgical) at an academic medical center in the United States.
Sixty-eight mechanically ventilated patients with subsyndromal delirium without complicating neurologic conditions, cardiac surgery, or requiring deep sedation.
Patients were randomly assigned to receive IV haloperidol 1 mg or placebo every 6 hours until delirium occurred (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist ≥ 4 with psychiatric confirmation), 10 days of therapy had elapsed, or ICU discharge.
Baseline characteristics were similar between the haloperidol (n = 34) and placebo (n = 34) groups. A similar number of patients given haloperidol (12/34 [35%]) and placebo (8/34 [23%]) developed delirium (p = 0.29). Haloperidol use reduced the hours per study day spent agitated (Sedation Agitation Scale ≥ 5) (p = 0.008), but it did not influence the proportion of 12-hour ICU shifts patients spent alive without coma (Sedation Agitation Scale ≤ 2) or delirium (p = 0.36), the time to first delirium occurrence (p = 0.22), nor delirium duration (p = 0.26). Days of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.80), ICU mortality (p = 0.55), and ICU patient disposition (p = 0.22) were similar in the two groups. The proportion of patients who developed corrected QT-interval prolongation (p = 0.16), extrapyramidal symptoms (p = 0.31), excessive sedation (p = 0.31), or new-onset hypotension (p = 1.0) that resulted in study drug discontinuation was comparable between the two groups.
Low-dose scheduled haloperidol, initiated early in the ICU stay, does not prevent delirium and has little therapeutic advantage in mechanically ventilated, critically ill adults with subsyndromal delirium.
比较定期给予小剂量氟哌啶醇与安慰剂对预防重症成年亚综合征谵妄患者(重症监护谵妄筛查清单评分=1 - 3)发生谵妄(重症监护谵妄筛查清单评分≥4)的疗效和安全性。
随机、双盲、安慰剂对照试验。
美国一家学术医疗中心的三个拥有10张床位的重症监护病房(两个内科和一个外科)。
68例机械通气的亚综合征谵妄患者,无复杂神经系统疾病、心脏手术史或无需深度镇静。
患者被随机分配接受静脉注射氟哌啶醇1毫克或安慰剂,每6小时一次,直至发生谵妄(重症监护谵妄筛查清单评分≥4且经精神科确认)、治疗满10天或从重症监护病房出院。
氟哌啶醇组(n = 34)和安慰剂组(n = 34)的基线特征相似。接受氟哌啶醇治疗的患者(12/34 [35%])和接受安慰剂治疗的患者(8/34 [23%])发生谵妄的人数相似(p = 0.29)。使用氟哌啶醇减少了每天研究时间内躁动的小时数(镇静躁动评分≥5)(p = 0.008),但未影响患者在12小时重症监护病房轮班期间无昏迷(镇静躁动评分≤2)且无谵妄存活的比例(p = 0.36)、首次发生谵妄的时间(p = 0.22)以及谵妄持续时间(p = 0.26)。两组的机械通气天数(p = 0.80)、重症监护病房死亡率(p = 0.55)和重症监护病房患者处置情况(p = 0.22)相似。两组中因校正QT间期延长(p = 0.16)、锥体外系症状(p = 0.31)、过度镇静(p = 0.31)或新发低血压(p = 1.0)导致停用研究药物的患者比例相当。
在重症监护病房住院早期开始使用小剂量定期氟哌啶醇,不能预防谵妄,对机械通气的重症成年亚综合征谵妄患者几乎没有治疗优势。