Summary of findings 3. ARIPIPRAZOLE (IM) compared to OTHER ANTIPSYCHOTIC: b. OLANZAPINE for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation).
| ARIPIPRAZOLE compared to OTHER ANTIPSYCHOTIC: b. OLANZAPINE for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation) | ||||||
| Patient or population: psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation) Setting: hospital Intervention: ARIPIPRAZOLE (intramuscular) Comparison: OTHER ANTIPSYCHOTIC: b. OLANZAPINE | ||||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Risk with OTHER ANTIPSYCHOTIC: b. OLANZAPINE | Risk with ARIPIPRAZOLE | |||||
| Tranquillisation or asleep | Not reported | |||||
| Repeated need for tranquillisation | Not reported | |||||
| Specific behaviour: Agitation ‐ clinically important change (PANSS ‐EC reduction ≥ 40% from baseline) ‐ up to 2 hours | Low | RR 0.77 (0.60 to 0.99) | 80 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ LOW1, 3 | ||
| 500 per 1.000 | 385 per 1.000 (300 to 495) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 800 per 1.000 | 616 per 1.000 (480 to 792) | |||||
| High | ||||||
| 900 per 1.000 | 693 per 1.000 (540 to 891) | |||||
| Global state: CGI‐S change score up to 2 hours | MD 0.58 (0.01 higher to 1.15 higher) | ‐ | 80 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ LOW 1, 3 | ||
| Adverse effects: one or more adverse effects during 24 hours | Study population | RR 0.75 (0.45 to 1.24) | 80 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW 2, 3 | ||
| 500 per 1.000 | 375 per 1.000 (225 to 620) | |||||
| Adverse effects: somnolence during 24 hours | Low | RR 0.25 (0.08 to 0.82) | 80 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ LOW 1, 3 | ||
| 100 per 1.000 | 25 per 1.000 (8 to 82) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 300 per 1.000 | 75 per 1.000 (24 to 246) | |||||
| High | ||||||
| 700 per 1.000 | 175 per 1.000 (56 to 574) | |||||
| Economic outcomes | Not reported | |||||
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect | ||||||
1 Imprecision ‐ rated 'serious' (downgraded by 1): Optimal Information Size (OIS) criterion is not met meaning that imprecision of effect estimates could not be properly handled.
2 Imprecision ‐ rated 'very serious' (downgraded by 2): Optimal Information Size (OIS) criterion is not met and CI overlaps no effect. High imprecision of effect estimates could not be properly excluded.
3 Indirectness ‐ rated 'serious' (downgraded by 1): attribution to the intervention drugs is suspected but can not be confirmed since in the study results it is showed that almost all the participants were administered with 'treatment as usual' drugs.