The American journal of emergency medicine · 2026
Intramuscular droperidol, olanzapine, midazolam, or lorazepam to treat methamphetamine intoxication in the emergency department.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cole Jon B, DeVries Paige A, O'Flaherty Jamie L, Arens Ann M, Olives Travis D, Martel Marc L, Miner James R, Driver Brian E
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Emergency department (ED) visits for acute methamphetamine-associated agitation are increasing. Many cases require parenteral medications. Benzodiazepines are often recommended first-line, however randomized trials of intravenous medications suggest antipsychotics are also effective. High-quality data on intramuscular medications are lacking.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of intramuscular droperidol, olanzapine, midazolam, and lorazepam to treat methamphetamine-associated agitation in the ED.
METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of previously published data from 2019 to 2020; medication, dose, route, and agitation etiology were determined by treating physicians. The primary outcome was time to adequate sedation (TAS), assessed via the Altered Mental Status Scale (AMSS), defined as time to AMSS≤0. Secondary outcomes included use of additional (rescue) medications and adverse events.
RESULTS: We analyzed 122 patients with similar baseline characteristics; 37 received droperidol (median dose 5 mg, TAS 16 min), 44 received olanzapine (median dose 10 mg, TAS 16 min), 15 received midazolam (median dose 5 mg, TAS 13 min), and 26 received lorazepam (median dose 2 mg, TAS 29 min). Proportional hazards analysis showed lorazepam was associated with longer TAS (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients adequately sedated at 15 min was 43% for droperidol, 45% for olanzapine, 60% for midazolam, and 32% for lorazepam. The proportion of patients receiving rescue medication was 16% for droperidol, 20% for olanzapine, 13% for midazolam, and 46% for lorazepam. We found no difference in adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: Intramuscular droperidol, olanzapine, and midazolam were all similarly effective for treating methamphetamine-associated agitation. All three medications provided more rapid and effective sedation than intramuscular lorazepam.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of intramuscular droperidol, olanzapine, midazolam, and lorazepam to treat methamphetamine-associated agitation in the ED.
METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of previously published data from 2019 to 2020; medication, dose, route, and agitation etiology were determined by treating physicians. The primary outcome was time to adequate sedation (TAS), assessed via the Altered Mental Status Scale (AMSS), defined as time to AMSS≤0. Secondary outcomes included use of additional (rescue) medications and adverse events.
RESULTS: We analyzed 122 patients with similar baseline characteristics; 37 received droperidol (median dose 5 mg, TAS 16 min), 44 received olanzapine (median dose 10 mg, TAS 16 min), 15 received midazolam (median dose 5 mg, TAS 13 min), and 26 received lorazepam (median dose 2 mg, TAS 29 min). Proportional hazards analysis showed lorazepam was associated with longer TAS (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients adequately sedated at 15 min was 43% for droperidol, 45% for olanzapine, 60% for midazolam, and 32% for lorazepam. The proportion of patients receiving rescue medication was 16% for droperidol, 20% for olanzapine, 13% for midazolam, and 46% for lorazepam. We found no difference in adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: Intramuscular droperidol, olanzapine, and midazolam were all similarly effective for treating methamphetamine-associated agitation. All three medications provided more rapid and effective sedation than intramuscular lorazepam.