Droperidol versus haloperidol for chemical restraint of agitated and combative patients

Harold (Hal) Thomas, Earl Schwartz, Robert Petrilli

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

128 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study objective: To compare two related pharmacological agents used for the chemical restraint of agitated and combative patients. Design and setting: A randomized, double-blind, prospective study was carried out in patients requiring physical restraint in a university hospital emergency department. Participants: Sixty-eight violent or agitated adult patients whom the attending physician believed would benefit from chemical restraint to protect the patient and staff and to expedite evaluation. Intervention: Twenty-one participants were administered 5 mg haloperidol IM; 26 were administered 5 mg droperidol IM; 12 were administered haloperidol IV; and nine were administered 5 mg droperidol IV. Results: All patients were rated on a five-point combativeness scale at five, ten, 15, 30, and 60 minutes after the study drug was given. Vital signs also were recorded at these times. IM droperidol decreased combativeness significantly more than IM haloperidol at ten (P = .006), 15 (P = .01), and 30 (P = .04) minutes. There was no significant difference between the two drugs when given by the IV route (β at the 5% confidence level, P = .78). Conclusion: In equal IM doses (5 mg), droperidol results in more rapid control of agitated patients than haloperidol, without any increase in undesirable side effects.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)407-413
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Emergency Medicine
Volume21
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 1992
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Droperidol
Haloperidol
Physical Restraint
Vital Signs
Hospital Departments
Double-Blind Method
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Hospital Emergency Service
Prospective Studies
Pharmacology
Physicians

Keywords

  • droperidol
  • haloperidol

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine

Cite this

Droperidol versus haloperidol for chemical restraint of agitated and combative patients. / Thomas, Harold (Hal); Schwartz, Earl; Petrilli, Robert.

In: Annals of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 21, No. 4, 1992, p. 407-413.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Thomas, Harold (Hal) ; Schwartz, Earl ; Petrilli, Robert. / Droperidol versus haloperidol for chemical restraint of agitated and combative patients. In: Annals of Emergency Medicine. 1992 ; Vol. 21, No. 4. pp. 407-413.
@article{f19f5ecdfe594cffbfc3ce0c30336cc0,
title = "Droperidol versus haloperidol for chemical restraint of agitated and combative patients",
abstract = "Study objective: To compare two related pharmacological agents used for the chemical restraint of agitated and combative patients. Design and setting: A randomized, double-blind, prospective study was carried out in patients requiring physical restraint in a university hospital emergency department. Participants: Sixty-eight violent or agitated adult patients whom the attending physician believed would benefit from chemical restraint to protect the patient and staff and to expedite evaluation. Intervention: Twenty-one participants were administered 5 mg haloperidol IM; 26 were administered 5 mg droperidol IM; 12 were administered haloperidol IV; and nine were administered 5 mg droperidol IV. Results: All patients were rated on a five-point combativeness scale at five, ten, 15, 30, and 60 minutes after the study drug was given. Vital signs also were recorded at these times. IM droperidol decreased combativeness significantly more than IM haloperidol at ten (P = .006), 15 (P = .01), and 30 (P = .04) minutes. There was no significant difference between the two drugs when given by the IV route (β at the 5{\%} confidence level, P = .78). Conclusion: In equal IM doses (5 mg), droperidol results in more rapid control of agitated patients than haloperidol, without any increase in undesirable side effects.",
keywords = "droperidol, haloperidol",
author = "Thomas, {Harold (Hal)} and Earl Schwartz and Robert Petrilli",
year = "1992",
doi = "10.1016/S0196-0644(05)82660-5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "407--413",
journal = "Annals of Emergency Medicine",
issn = "0196-0644",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Droperidol versus haloperidol for chemical restraint of agitated and combative patients

AU - Thomas, Harold (Hal)

AU - Schwartz, Earl

AU - Petrilli, Robert

PY - 1992

Y1 - 1992

N2 - Study objective: To compare two related pharmacological agents used for the chemical restraint of agitated and combative patients. Design and setting: A randomized, double-blind, prospective study was carried out in patients requiring physical restraint in a university hospital emergency department. Participants: Sixty-eight violent or agitated adult patients whom the attending physician believed would benefit from chemical restraint to protect the patient and staff and to expedite evaluation. Intervention: Twenty-one participants were administered 5 mg haloperidol IM; 26 were administered 5 mg droperidol IM; 12 were administered haloperidol IV; and nine were administered 5 mg droperidol IV. Results: All patients were rated on a five-point combativeness scale at five, ten, 15, 30, and 60 minutes after the study drug was given. Vital signs also were recorded at these times. IM droperidol decreased combativeness significantly more than IM haloperidol at ten (P = .006), 15 (P = .01), and 30 (P = .04) minutes. There was no significant difference between the two drugs when given by the IV route (β at the 5% confidence level, P = .78). Conclusion: In equal IM doses (5 mg), droperidol results in more rapid control of agitated patients than haloperidol, without any increase in undesirable side effects.

AB - Study objective: To compare two related pharmacological agents used for the chemical restraint of agitated and combative patients. Design and setting: A randomized, double-blind, prospective study was carried out in patients requiring physical restraint in a university hospital emergency department. Participants: Sixty-eight violent or agitated adult patients whom the attending physician believed would benefit from chemical restraint to protect the patient and staff and to expedite evaluation. Intervention: Twenty-one participants were administered 5 mg haloperidol IM; 26 were administered 5 mg droperidol IM; 12 were administered haloperidol IV; and nine were administered 5 mg droperidol IV. Results: All patients were rated on a five-point combativeness scale at five, ten, 15, 30, and 60 minutes after the study drug was given. Vital signs also were recorded at these times. IM droperidol decreased combativeness significantly more than IM haloperidol at ten (P = .006), 15 (P = .01), and 30 (P = .04) minutes. There was no significant difference between the two drugs when given by the IV route (β at the 5% confidence level, P = .78). Conclusion: In equal IM doses (5 mg), droperidol results in more rapid control of agitated patients than haloperidol, without any increase in undesirable side effects.

KW - droperidol

KW - haloperidol

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026583337&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026583337&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0196-0644(05)82660-5

DO - 10.1016/S0196-0644(05)82660-5

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 407

EP - 413

JO - Annals of Emergency Medicine

JF - Annals of Emergency Medicine

SN - 0196-0644

IS - 4

ER -