MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2114678500 · doi:10.1186/cc9200

Clearing up the confusion: The results of two pilot studies of antipsychotics for ICU delirium

2010· letter· en· W2114678500 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zaher Qassem, Eric B Milbrandt

Notice bibliographique

RevueCritical Care · 2010
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDeliriumMedicinePlaceboSedationIntensive care unitHaloperidolIntensive careComa (optics)Organic mental disordersAdverse effectAnesthesiaRandomized controlled trialMechanical ventilationEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Expanded AbstractCitation #1Girard TD, Pandharipande PP, Carson SS, Schmidt GA, Wright PE, Canonico AE, Pun BT, Thompson JL, ShintaniAK, Meltzer HY, Bernard GR, Ditt us RS, Ely EW: Feasibility, efficacy, and safety of antipsychotics for intensive care unit delirium: the MIND randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Crit Care Med 2010, 38:428-437 [1].BackgroundGiven the lack of compelling evidence supporting the use of antipsychotics for delirium in critically ill patients and the potential adverse effects associated with these medications, placebo-controlled clinical trials are greatly needed.MethodsObjectiveTo demonstrate the feasibility of a placebo-controlled trial of antipsychotics for delirium in the intensive care unit and to test the hypothesis that antipsychotics would improve days alive without delirium or coma.DesignRandomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.SettingSix tertiary care medical centers in the US.SubjectsOne hundred one mechanically ventilated medical and surgical intensive care unit patients.InterventionPatients were randomly assigned to receive haloperidol or ziprasidone or placebo every 6 hrs for up to 14 days. Twice each day, frequency of study drug administration was adjusted according to delirium status, level of sedation, and side effects.OutcomesThe primary end point was the number of days patients were alive without delirium or coma. Secondary efficacy end points included daily delirium risk, duration of delirium, duration of coma, the number of days patients were alive and breathing without assistance during the 21-day study period (ventilator-free days), time to ICU and hospital discharge, and all-cause 21-day survival.ResultsDuring the 21-day study period, patients in the haloperidol group spent a similar number days alive without delirium or coma (median [inter quartile range], 14.0 [6.0-18.0] days) as did patients in the ziprasidone (15.0 [9.1-18.0] days) and placebo groups (12.5 [1.2-17.2] days; p = 0.66). No differences were found in secondary clinical outcomes, including ventilator-free days (p = .25), hospital length of stay (p = .68), and mortality (p = .81). Ten (29%) patients in the haloperidol group reported symptoms consistent with akathisia, compared with six (20%) patients in the ziprasidone group and seven (19%) patients in the placebo group (p = .60), and a global measure of extra pyramidal symptoms was similar between treatment groups (p = .46).ConclusionsA randomized, placebo-controlled trial of antipsychotics for delirium in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients is feasible. Treatment with antipsychotics in this limited pilot trial did not improve the number of days alive without delirium or coma, nor did it increase adverse outcomes. Thus, a large trial is needed to determine whether use of antipsychotics for intensive care unit delirium is appropriate.Citation #2Devlin JW, Roberts RJ, Fong JJ, Skrobik Y, Riker RR, Hill NS, Robbins T, Garpestad E: Efficacy and safety of quetiapine in critically ill patients with delirium: a prospective, multi center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study. Crit Care Med 2010, 38:419-427 [2].BackgroundTo date, there are no published double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials to establish the efficacy or safety of any antipsychotic medication in the management of delirium in the ICU.MethodsObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of scheduled quetiapine to placebo for the treatment of delirium in critically ill patients requiring as-needed haloperidol.DesignProspective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.SettingThree academic medical centers in the US and Canada.SubjectsThirty-six adult intensive care unit patients with delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist score > = 4), tolerating enteral nutrition, and without a complicating neurologic condition.InterventionPatients were randomized to receive quetiapine 50 mg every 12 hrs or placebo. Quetiapine was increased every 24 hrs (50 to 100 to 150 to 200 m gevery 12 hrs) if more than one dose of haloperidol was given in the previous 24 hrs. Study drug was continued until the intensive care unit team discontinued it because of delirium resolution, therapy > = 10 days, or intensive care unit discharge.OutcomesThe primary end point was time to first resolution of delirium. Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital length of stay, hospital mortality, and discharge disposition. Measures of safety included total number of adverse and serious adverse events related to study drug, incidence of extra pyramidal symptoms, and episodes of QTc interval prolongation.ResultsBaseline characteristics were similar between the quetiapine (n = 18) and placebo (n = 18) groups. Quetiapine was associated with a shorter time to first resolution of delirium [1.0 (inter quartile range [IQR], 0.5-3.0) vs. 4.5 days (IQR, 2.0-7.0; p = .001)], a reduced duration of delirium [36 (IQR, 12-87) vs. 120 hrs (IQR, 60-195; p = .006)], and less agitation (Sedation-Agitation Scale score > = 5) [6 (IQR, 0-38) vs. 36 hrs (IQR, 11-66; p = .02)]. Whereas mortality (11% quetiapine vs. 17%) and intensive care unit length of stay (16 quetiapine vs. 16 days) were similar, subjects treated with quetiapine were more likely to be discharged home or to rehabilitation (89% quetiapine vs. 56%; p = .06). Subjects treated with quetiapine required fewer days of as-needed haloperidol [3 [(IQR, 2-4)] vs. 4 days (IQR, 3-8; p = .05)]. Whereas the incidence of QTc prolongation and extrapyramidal symptoms was similar between groups, more somnolence was observed with quetiapine (22% vs. 11%; p = .66).ConclusionsQuetiapine added to as-needed haloperidol results in faster delirium resolution, less agitation, and a greater rate of transfer to home or rehabilitation. Future studies should evaluate the effect of quetiapine on mortality, resource utilization, post-intensive care unit cognition, and dependency after discharge in a broader group of patients.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,062
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Intégrité de la recherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,341
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,062
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,002
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,115
Tête enseignante GPT0,415
Écart entre enseignants0,299 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations10
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCritical CareMême sujetIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersTravaux en français237 207