Jafari Mohammadali, Biuki Amir Aliheidari, Hajimaghsoudi Majid, Bagherabadi Mehdi, Zarepur Ehsan
Emergency Medicine department, Shahid Sadoughi Hospital, School of Medicine, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.
Emergency Medicine Department, Shahid Sadoughi Hospital, Trauma Research Center, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.
Emerg (Tehran). 2018;6(1):e43. Epub 2018 Jul 14.
Conversion disorder is a condition in which the patient shows psychological stress in physical ways. This study aimed to compare the effects of haloperidol versus midazolam in patients with conversion disorder.
This double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on patients with conversion disorder who had presented to the emergency department, throughout 2015. Patients were randomly divided into two groups and were either treated with 2.5 mg of intravenous (IV) haloperidol or 2.5 mg of IV midazolam. Recovery rate, time to recovery, and side effects of both drugs 1 hour, 24 hours, and 1 week after treatment were compared using SPSS19.
140 patients were divided into two groups of 70. There were no significant differences between the groups regarding the baseline characteristics. 12 (17.1%) patients who were treated with IV haloperidol experienced drug side effects within 1 hour and 12 (17.1%) within 24 hours, while only 3 (4.3%) patients in IV midazolam experienced side-effects within 1 hour after drug administration (p = 0.026). The symptoms of the disease subsided in 45 (success rate: 64.3%) patients in midazolam and in 64 (success rate: 91.5%) participants in haloperidol group (P<0.001). Mean recovery time was 31.24 ± 7.03 minutes in IV midazolam and 30.53 ± 7.11 minutes in IV haloperidol group (p = 0.592). Absolute risk reduction (ARR) of treating patients with haloperidol compared to midazolam is about 27%.
The response of patients to treatment with haloperidol is clearly better than midazolam. Although more transient and minor side-effects were observed in the group treated with haloperidol compared to midazolam group, serious side-effects were rare for both treatments.
转换障碍是一种患者以身体方式表现心理压力的病症。本研究旨在比较氟哌啶醇与咪达唑仑对转换障碍患者的疗效。
本双盲随机临床试验于2015年全年在急诊科就诊的转换障碍患者中进行。患者被随机分为两组,分别接受2.5毫克静脉注射氟哌啶醇或2.5毫克静脉注射咪达唑仑治疗。使用SPSS19比较治疗后1小时、24小时和1周时两种药物的恢复率、恢复时间及副作用。
140例患者分为两组,每组70例。两组患者的基线特征无显著差异。静脉注射氟哌啶醇治疗的患者中有12例(17.1%)在1小时内出现药物副作用,12例(17.1%)在24小时内出现;而静脉注射咪达唑仑的患者中只有3例(4.3%)在用药后1小时内出现副作用(p = 0.026)。咪达唑仑组45例患者(成功率:64.3%)的疾病症状消退,氟哌啶醇组64例患者(成功率:91.5%)的症状消退(P<0.001)。静脉注射咪达唑仑组的平均恢复时间为31.24±7.03分钟,静脉注射氟哌啶醇组为30.53±7.11分钟(p = 0.592)。与咪达唑仑相比,用氟哌啶醇治疗患者的绝对风险降低(ARR)约为27%。
患者对氟哌啶醇治疗的反应明显优于咪达唑仑。虽然与咪达唑仑组相比,氟哌啶醇治疗组观察到更多短暂和轻微的副作用,但两种治疗的严重副作用都很少见。