...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical therapeutics >A comparison of the efficacy and safety of olanzapine versus haloperidol during transition from intramuscular to oral therapy.
【24h】

A comparison of the efficacy and safety of olanzapine versus haloperidol during transition from intramuscular to oral therapy.

机译:奥氮平与氟哌啶醇从肌内治疗到口服治疗过渡期间的疗效和安全性比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia who receive intramuscular (IM) medications typically are switched to oral (PO) antipsychotic maintenance therapy. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of olanzapine versus those of haloperidol during transition from IM to PO therapy. We used additional data from a previously reported trial to test the hypothesis that the reduction in agitation achieved by IM olanzapine 10 mg or IM haloperidol 7.5 mg would be maintained following transition to 4 days of PO olanzapine or PO haloperidol (5-20 mg/d for both). We also hypothesized that olanzapine would maintain its more favorable extrapyramidal symptom (EPS) safety profile. METHODS: This was a multinational (hospitals in 13 countries), double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Acutely agitated inpatients with schizophrenia were treated with 1 to 3 IM injections to olanzapine 10 mg or haloperidol 7.5 mg over 24 hours and were entered into a 4-day PO treatment periodwith the same medication (5-20 mg/d for both). The primary efficacy measurement was reduction in agitation, as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) score. Adverse events and scores on EPS rating scales were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 311 patients (204 men, 107 women; mean [SD] age, 38.2 [11.6] years) were enrolled (131, 126, and 54 patients in the olanzapine, haloperidol, and placebo groups, respectively). In all, 93.1% (122/131) of olanzapine-treated patients and 92.1% (116/126) of haloperidol-treated patients completed the IM period and entered the PO period; 85.5% (112/131) of olanzapine-treated patients and 84.1% (106/126) of haloperidol-treated patients completed the PO period. IM olanzapine and IM haloperidol effectively reduced agitation over 24 hours (mean [SD] PANSS-EC change, -7.1 [4.81 vs -6.7 [4.3], respectively). Reductions in agitation were sustained throughout the PO period with both study drugs (mean [SD] change from PO period baseline, -0.6 [4.8] vs -1.3 [4.4], respectively). During PO treatment, haloperidol-treated patients spontaneously reported significantly more acute dystonia than olanzapine-treated patients (4.3%[5/116] vs 0% [0/122], respectively; P = 0.026) and akathisia (5.2% [6/116] vs 0% [0/122], respectively; P = 0.013). Significantly more haloperidol-treated patients than olanzapine-treated patients met categorical criteria for treatment-emergent akathisia (18.5% [17/92] vs 6.5% [7/107], respectively; P = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: In the acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia in this study, both IM olanzapine 10 mg and IM haloperidol 7.5 mg effectively reduced agitation over 24 hours. This alleviation of agitation was sustained following transition from IM therapy to 4 days of PO treatment (5-20 mg/d for both). During the 4 days of PO treatment, olanzapine-treated patients did not spontaneously report any incidences of acute dystonia, and olanzapine had a superior EPS safety profile to that of haloperidol. The combination of IM andPO olanzapine may help improve the treatment of acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia.
机译:背景:接受肌内(IM)药物治疗的精神分裂症急性发作患者通常会改用口服(PO)抗精神病药物维持治疗。目的:本研究的目的是评估从IM到PO治疗期间奥氮平与氟哌啶醇的疗效和安全性。我们使用先前报道的试验中的其他数据来测试以下假设:将口服olanzapine或PO氟哌啶醇(4-20 mg / d)转换为4天后,可以维持IM olanzapine 10 mg或IM haloperidol 7.5 mg所实现的躁动减少。对彼此而言)。我们还假设奥氮平将维持其更有利的锥体外系症状(EPS)安全性。方法:这是一家跨国公司(13个国家的医院)双盲,随机,对照试验。急性精神分裂症住院患者在24小时内接受1至3次IM注射奥氮平10 mg或氟哌啶醇7.5 mg的治疗,并以相同药物进入4天的PO治疗期(两者均为5-20 mg / d)。主要疗效指标是根据正,负综合症量表兴奋成分(PANSS-EC)评分测量的躁动减少。评估不良事件和EPS评分量表的分数。结果:总共招募了311例患者(204例男性,107例女性;平均[SD]年龄,38.2 [11.6]岁)(奥氮平,氟哌啶醇和安慰剂组分别为131例,126例和54例)。总共有93.1%(122/131)的奥氮平治疗患者和92.1%(116/126)的氟哌啶醇治疗患者完成了IM期并进入了PO期。奥氮平治疗的患者中有85.5%(112/131),氟哌啶醇治疗的患者中有84.1%(106/126)完成了PO期。 IM奥氮平和IM氟哌啶醇可在24小时内有效减少躁动(平均[SD] PANSS-EC变化,分别为-7.1 [4.81 vs -6.7 [4.3])。两种研究药物在整个PO期间持续减少躁动(从PO期间基线开始的平均[SD]变化,分别为-0.6 [4.8]和-1.3 [4.4])。在PO治疗期间,氟哌啶醇治疗的患者自发报告的急性肌张力障碍明显高于奥氮平治疗的患者(分别为4.3%[5/116]和0%[0/122]; P = 0.026)和静坐不全(5.2%[6 / 116] vs 0%[0/122]; P = 0.013)。与奥氮平治疗的患者相比,氟哌啶醇治疗的患者符合突发性静坐症的绝对标准(分别为18.5%[17/92]和6.5%[7/107]; P = 0.015)。结论:在这项研究中的急性精神分裂症患者中,IM olanzapine 10 mg和IM haloperidol 7.5 mg均可在24小时内有效减少躁动。从IM治疗过渡到PO治疗4天(两者均为5-20 mg / d)后,这种缓解缓解的作用持续。在PO治疗的4天中,奥氮平治疗的患者没有自发报告任何急性肌张力障碍的发生,并且奥氮平的EPS安全性优于氟哌啶醇。 IM和PO奥氮平的组合可能有助于改善急性精神分裂症患者的治疗。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号