Clinical trial NCT03246620: Oral Olanzapine Versus Haloperidol or Diazepam
Official title: Oro-dispersible Olanzapine (Wafer) Versus Conventional Oral Haloperidol or Diazepam Tablets for the Management of Acute Agitation in the Accident and Emergency Department - a Multicentre Randomised Clinical Trial
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: TERMINATED
Phase: PHASE4
Conditions: Acute Agitation
Behavioural Emergency
Keywords: emergency
emergency medicine
sedation
acute agitation
Lead sponsor: The University of Hong Kong
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Hong Kong
First posted: 2017-08-11
Enrollment: 12
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Maximum age (years): 75
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Primary purpose: TREATMENT

Brief summary: The purpose of this study is to determine whether oral olanzapine is safer (fewer adverse events) and more effective (shorter time to sedation) than conventional haloperidol or diazepam when used in the management of acute agitation in the emergency.

Detailed description: 1. Investigate oral use of sedating drugs within a predominantly Chinese population, to address this void in international literature impacting the management of acute agitation.
2. The multi-centre Randomised Clinical Trial will determine the safety and efficacy of oral olanzapine, in comparison with conventional medicines (haloperidol or diazepam) in a three-arm comparison for the sedation of acutely agitated patients in AEDs. Specifically, we aim to determine if administration of oral olanzapine (a)is more effective than sedation with oral haloperidol or oral diazepam alone; (b)is safer than sedation with comparison arms; (c)decreases the amount of subsequent redosing or alternative drugs required; (d)is more favourable than the haloperidol and diazepam arms with respect to safety, efficacy and adverse events.

Investigate potential variables leading to AED attendance and/or admission requiring oral sedation. These may include patient demographic and regular medications and adherence.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* Accident \& Emergency Department patients
* Requiring oral drug sedation (as determined by an emergency clinician) will be enrolled.

Exclusion Criteria:

* known hypersensitivity or contraindication to the study drugs
* reversible aetiology for agitation (e.g. hypotension, hypoxia, hypoglycaemia)
* known pregnancy
* acute alcohol withdrawal
* refusal to take oral medication
* patients from correctional facilities

Primary outcomes:
measure: Time to achieve adequate sedation
timeFrame: Within 60 minutes from drug administration
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Total study drug doses administered; alternative drugs and doses used
timeFrame: From Accident & Emergency Department(AED) admission to transfer or discharge from AED, an expected average of 1 hour
measure: Corrected QT interval (QTc)
timeFrame: From Accident & Emergency Department(AED) admission to transfer or discharge from AED, an expected average of 1 hour
measure: AED length of stay (LOS)
timeFrame: From Accident & Emergency Department(AED) admission to transfer or discharge from AED, an expected average of 1 hour
measure: Adverse events
timeFrame: From Accident & Emergency Department(AED) admission to transfer or discharge from AED, an expected average of 1 hour
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Hong Kong
country: Hong Kong
facility: Queen Elizabeth Hospital
Study officials:
References:
citation: Knott JC, Bennett D, Rawet J, Taylor DM. Epidemiology of unarmed threats in the emergency department. Emerg Med Australas. 2005 Aug;17(4):351-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2005.00756.x.
citation: Chan EW, Taylor DM, Knott JC, Phillips GA, Castle DJ, Kong DC. Intravenous droperidol or olanzapine as an adjunct to midazolam for the acutely agitated patient: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2013 Jan;61(1):72-81. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.07.118. Epub 2012 Sep 13.
citation: Knott JC, Taylor DM, Castle DJ. Randomized clinical trial comparing intravenous midazolam and droperidol for sedation of the acutely agitated patient in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 2006 Jan;47(1):61-7. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.07.003. Epub 2005 Aug 18.
citation: Chan EW, Taylor DM, Knott JC, Kong DC. Variation in the management of hypothetical cases of acute agitation in Australasian emergency departments. Emerg Med Australas. 2011 Feb;23(1):23-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2010.01348.x. Epub 2010 Nov 22.
citation: Chan EW, Knott JC, Taylor DM, Phillips GA, Kong DC. Intravenous olanzapine--another option for the acutely agitated patient? Emerg Med Australas. 2009 Jun;21(3):241-2. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-6723.2009.01190.x. No abstract available.
citation: Chan EW, Taylor DM, Knott JC, Liew D, Kong DC. The pharmacoeconomics of managing acute agitation in the emergency department: what do we know and how do we approach it? Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2012 Oct;12(5):589-95. doi: 10.1586/erp.12.53.
citation: Chan EW, Tang C, Lao KS, Ling Pong L, Tsui MS, Ho HF, Wong GC, Kong DC, McD Taylor D, Knott JC, Wong IC. Management of acute agitation in Hong Kong and comparisons with Australasia. Emerg Med Australas. 2015 Dec;27(6):542-548. doi: 10.1111/1742-6723.12499. Epub 2015 Dec 3.
citation: Yap CYL, Taylor DM, Knott JC, Taylor SE, Phillips GA, Karro J, Chan EW, Kong DCM, Castle DJ. Intravenous midazolam-droperidol combination, droperidol or olanzapine monotherapy for methamphetamine-related acute agitation: subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial. Addiction. 2017 Jul;112(7):1262-1269. doi: 10.1111/add.13780. Epub 2017 Feb 28.