Summary of findings 15. HALOPERIDOL compared to BENZODIAZEPINE: c. MIDAZOLAM for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation.
| HALOPERIDOL compared with BENZODIAZEPINE: c. MIDAZOLAM for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation | ||||||
| Patient or population: patients with psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation Setting: emergency room. Intervention: HALOPERIDOL Comparison: BENZODIAZEPINE: c. MIDAZOLAM | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| BENZODIAZEPINE: c. MIDAZOLAM | HALOPERIDOL | |||||
| Tranquillisation or asleep ‐ not reported | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | No study reported this outcome. |
| Repeated need for rapid tranquillisation ‐ not reported | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | No study reported this outcome. |
| Specific behaviour ‐ threat or injury to self or others ‐ not reported | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | No study reported this outcome. |
| Global outcome Need for rescue drug | Low1 | RR 1.14 (0.46 to 2.87) | 84 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low2,3 | ||
| 50 per 1000 | 57 per 1000 (23 to 143) | |||||
| Moderate1 | ||||||
| 150 per 1000 | 171 per 1000 (69 to 430) | |||||
| High1 | ||||||
| 250 per 1000 | 285 per 1000 (115 to 717) | |||||
| Adverse effects ‐ general ‐ one or more drug‐related adverse effect | Low4 | RR 5.00 (0.25 to 101.11) | 84 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low3,5 | ||
| 0 per 1000 | 0 per 1000 (0 to 0) | |||||
| Moderate4 | ||||||
| 50 per 1000 | 250 per 1000 (12 to 1000) | |||||
| High4 | ||||||
| 100 per 1000 | 500 per 1000 (25 to 1000) | |||||
| Economic outcome ‐ not reported | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | No study reported this outcome. |
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | ||||||
1 Medium risk is roughly equal to that of the trial control group. 2 Indirectness: rated 'serious' ‐ no measure for overall improvement, no overall improvement inferred from need for rescue drug. 3 Imprecision: rated 'serious' ‐ 95% confidence interval is wide. 4 Low risk is roughly equal to that of the trial control group. 5 Indirectness: rated 'serious' ‐ no serious adverse effect, therefore used one or more adverse effects.