Summary of findings 16. HALOPERIDOL compared to COMBINATIONS: a. HALOPERIDOL + LEVOMEPROMAZINE for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation.
| HALOPERIDOL compared with 1. COMBINATIONS ‐ HALOPERIDOL + LEVOMEPROMAZINE for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation | ||||||
| Patient or population: patients with psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation Setting: inpatients. Intervention: HALOPERIDOL Comparison: COMBINATIONS: a. HALOPERIDOL + LEVOMEPROMAZINE | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| COMBINATIONS: a. HALOPERIDOL + LEVOMEPROMAZINE | HALOPERIDOL | |||||
| Tranquillisation or asleep ‐ not reported | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | No study reported this outcome. |
| Repeated need for tranquillisation ‐ not reported | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | No study reported this outcome. |
| Specific behaviours ‐ threat or injury to self or others ‐ not reported | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | No study reported this outcome. |
| Global outcome: general ‐ no overall improvement | Low1 | RR 8.18 (0.5 to 133.66) | 19 (1 study) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low2,3,4 | ||
| 0 per 1000 | 0 per 1000 (0 to 0) | |||||
| Moderate1 | ||||||
| 200 per 1000 | 1000 per 1000 (100 to 1000) | |||||
| High1 | ||||||
| 400 per 1000 | 1000 per 1000 (200 to 1000) | |||||
| Adverse effect: any serious, specific ‐ not reported | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | No study reported this outcome. |
| Economic outcome ‐ not measured | 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 Low risk is roughly equal to that of the trial control group. 2 Risk of bias: rated 'very serious' ‐ method of randomisation not described, allocation concealment not stated, open trial, no reporting of the presence or absence of adverse effects in the results, small study. 3 Imprecision: rated 'very serious' ‐ very small study (n = 19), 95% confidence interval is wide. 4 Publication bias: rated 'strongly suspected' ‐ small study.