An Open-label, Randomized Trial of Intramuscular (IM) Olanzapine Versus Intramuscular Combination of Haloperidol and Lorazepam in the Treatment of Acute Agitation in Schizophrenia
An Open-label, Randomized Trial of Intramuscular (IM) Olanzapine Versus Intramuscular Combination of Haloperidol and Lorazepam in the Treatment of Acute Agitation in Schizophrenia
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of intramuscular 10 mg olanzapine versus intramuscular 5 mg haloperidol plus lorazepam 2 mg in the treatment of acute agitated schizophrenic patients of Taiwanese populations.
To date, there have been no published reports of clinical studies of IM olanzapine versus IM haloperidol plus lorazepam in acute schizophrenia patients with moderate to severe degree of agitation. The latter combination of treatment is used quite often as a traditional way to treat agitated schizophrenia patients.
Study Design:
This is a randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group study, consisting of screening and treatment phase. Patients completing the screening phase would be randomized to receive either 10mg olanzapine IM or 5 mg haloperidol plus 2 mg lorazepam IM . The ratio of randomization was 1:1. Treatment assignments are based on a computer-generated randomization code supplied by central unit with block designs. Patients can receive a maximum of 3 injections within the first 24-hour period. Second and third injections are used under the clinical judgment of investigators. The second injection is allowed after 2-hour has elapsed since first injection. The third injection is allowed after 4-hour have passed since the second injection. Prohibited medications include antiarrythmics, antipsychotics, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, antiemetics, and other psychotropic drugs.
Efficacy Assessments:
Patients are assessed by the study investigators at the screening visit and at 15, 30, 60, 120 minutes after first injection. The primary efficacy measure is PANSS-EC, which includes the items tension, uncooperativeness, hostility, poor impulse control, excitement and is derived from the PANSS by its originators using a principal-components factor analysis. Agitation is further assessed by the Agitation-Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES) (Copyright 1998, Eli Lilly and Company; all rights reserved). Clinical Global Impression-Severity（CGI-S）scale37 is used to assess general psychiatric condition. For each patient, the same rater conducted the assessment throughout the study.
Safety assessments:
During the 24-hour treatment period, safety is assessed by clinical examination and laboratory investigations, recording spontaneously reported adverse events, completing the Simpson-Angus Scale (SAS) and Barnes Akathisia Scales (BAS).
Statistical Procedures:
The efficacy analyses were based on intent to treat (ITT) population defined as consisting of all randomized subjects. The last observation carried forward (LOCF) dataset was used to estimate the missing data. Data were analysed using statistical program R Language version 2.8.0 (http://www.r-project.org/), with significance set at p < .05. Demographic characteristics and clinical parameters at baseline were compared by treatment group using the t-test for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables. The primary treatment comparison was 2-hour PANSS-EC scores after first injection. Continuous efficacy and safety data were evaluated by multiple linear regression, adjusting for treatment group, center, and treatment-by-center interaction. The treatment-by-center interaction was tested at the 0.10 significant levels and dropped from the model if it was not statistically significant. To compare the number difference in adverse events between two treatment groups, Fisher's exact test was used due to low cell counts.
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria: