-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2013Fluphenazine is one of the first drugs to be classed as an 'antipsychotic' and has been widely available for five decades. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Fluphenazine is one of the first drugs to be classed as an 'antipsychotic' and has been widely available for five decades.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effects of oral fluphenazine with placebo for the treatment of schizophrenia.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated searches of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's trials register, which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the bibliographic databases Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, The Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycLIT, LILACS, PSYNDEX, Sociological Abstracts and Sociofile, 15 May, 2012. References of all identified studies were searched for further trial citations.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We sought all randomised controlled trials comparing oral fluphenazine with placebo relevant to people with schizophrenia. Primary outcomes of interest were global state and adverse effects.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We inspected citations and abstracts independently, ordered papers and re-inspected and quality assessed trials. We extracted data independently. Dichotomous data were analysed using fixed-effect risk ratio (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous data were excluded if more than 50% of people were lost to follow-up, but, where possible, mean differences (MD) were calculated.
MAIN RESULTS
From over 1200 electronic records of 415 studies identified by our initial search and this updated search, we excluded 48 potentially relevant studies and included seven trials published between 1964 and 1999 that randomised 439 (mostly adult participants). No new included trials were identified for this review update. Compared with placebo, global state outcomes of 'not improved or worsened' were not significantly different in the medium term in one small study (n = 50, 1 RCT, RR 1.12 CI 0.79 to 1.58, very low quality of evidence). The risk of relapse in the long term was greater in two small studies in people receiving placebo (n = 86, 2 RCTs, RR 0.39 CI 0.05 to 3.31, very low quality of evidence), however with high degree of heterogeneity in the results. Only one person allocated fluphenazine was reported in the same small study to have died on long-term follow-up (n = 50, 1 RCT, RR 2.38 CI 0.10 to 55.72, low quality of evidence). Short-term extrapyramidal adverse effects were significantly more frequent with fluphenazine compared to placebo in two other studies for the outcomes of akathisia (n = 227, 2 RCTs, RR 3.43 CI 1.23 to 9.56, moderate quality of evidence) and rigidity (n = 227, 2 RCTs, RR 3.54 CI 1.76 to 7.14, moderate quality of evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The findings in this review confirm much that clinicians and recipients of care already know, but they provide quantification to support clinical impression. Fluphenazine's global position as an effective treatment for psychoses is not threatened by the outcome of this review. However, fluphenazine is an imperfect treatment and if accessible, other inexpensive drugs less associated with adverse effects may be an equally effective choice for people with schizophrenia.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antipsychotic Agents; Fluphenazine; Humans; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 23861067
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006352.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2011Long-term treatment with antipsychotic medications in early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders is common, but both short and long-term effects on the illness are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Long-term treatment with antipsychotic medications in early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders is common, but both short and long-term effects on the illness are unclear. There have been numerous suggestions that people with early episodes of schizophrenia appear to respond differently than those with multiple prior episodes. The number of episodes may moderate response to drug treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of antipsychotic medication treatment on people with early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group register (July 2007) as well as references of included studies. We contacted authors of studies for further data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies with a majority of first and second episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders comparing initial antipsychotic medication treatment with placebo, milieu, or psychosocial treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Working independently, we critically appraised records from 681studies, of which five studies met inclusion criteria. John Rathbone from the Schizophrenia Group supported us with the data extraction. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) where possible. For continuous data, we calculated mean difference (MD). We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies with a combined N = 998 met inclusion criteria. Four studies (N = 724) provided leaving the study early data and results suggested that individuals treated with a typical antipsychotic medication are less likely to leave the study early than those treated with placebo (Chlorpromazine: 3 RCTs N = 353, RR 0.4 CI 0.3 to 0.5, NNT 3.2, Fluphenaxine: 1 RCT N = 240, RR 0.5 CI 0.3 to 0.8, NNT 5; Thioridazine: 1 RCT N = 236, RR 0.44 CI 0.3 to 0.7, NNT 4.3, Trifulperazine: 1 RCT N = 94, RR 0.96 CI 0.3 to 3.6). Two studies (Cole 1964; May 1976) contributed data to assessment of side effects and present a general pattern of more frequent side effects among individuals treated with typical antipsychotic medications compared to placebo. Rappaport 1978 suggested a higher rehospitalisation rate for those receiving chlorpromazine compared to placebo (N = 80, RR 2.29 CI 1.3 to 4.0, NNH 2.9). However, a higher attrition in the placebo group is likely to have introduced a survivor bias into this comparison, as this difference becomes non-significant in a sensitivity analysis on intent-to-treat participants (N = 127, RR 1.69 CI 0.9 to 3.0). One study (May 1976) contributes data to a comparison of trifluoperazine to psychotherapy on long-term health in favour of the trifluoperazine group (N = 92, MD 5.8 CI 1.6 to 0.0); however, data from this study are also likely to contain biases due to selection and attrition. One study (Mosher 1995) contributes data to a comparison of typical antipsychotic medication to psychosocial treatment on six-week outcome measures of global psychopathology (N = 89, MD 0.01 CI -0.6 to 0.6) and global improvement (N = 89, MD -0.03 CI -0.5 to 0.4), indicating no between-group differences. On the whole, there is very little useable data in the few studies meeting inclusion criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
With only a few studies meeting inclusion criteria, and with limited useable data in these studies, it is not possible to arrive at definitive conclusions. The preliminary pattern of evidence suggests that people with early episode schizophrenia treated with typical antipsychotic medications are less likely to leave the study early, but more likely to experience medication-related side effects. Data are too sparse to assess the effects of antipsychotic medication on outcomes in early episode schizophrenia.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Chlorpromazine; Fluphenazine; Humans; Patient Dropouts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia; Thioridazine; Trifluoperazine
PubMed: 21678355
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006374.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2010Levomepromazine is an 'older' typical antipsychotic medication licensed for use in schizophrenia but sparingly prescribed in the United Kingdom. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Levomepromazine is an 'older' typical antipsychotic medication licensed for use in schizophrenia but sparingly prescribed in the United Kingdom.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the clinical effects and safety of levomepromazine compared with placebo or antipsychotic medications for schizophrenia and schizophreniform psychoses.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (December 2008) which is based on regular searches of, amongst others, BIOSIS, CENTRAL CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. References of all identified studies were inspected for further trials. We also contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies for additional information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised trials comparing levomepromazine with placebo or other antipsychotics for schizophrenia and schizophreniform psychoses were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data were extracted independently. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated relative risk (RR) (random-effects model), 95% confidence intervals (CI) and, where appropriate, number needed to treat (NNT) was calculated. We avoided the use of number needed to harm (NNH), as an alternative we used number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) and number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) to indicate the direction of effect. For continuous outcomes, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD).
MAIN RESULTS
The review currently includes 4 RCTs with 192 participants. For our primary outcome of leaving the study early, levomepromazine was not significantly different compared with other antipsychotics. The levomepromazine arm was significantly better on CGI severity compared with chlorpromazine (n=38, 1 RCT, WMD -0.80 CI -1.51 to -0.09). Risperidone was better for CGI endpoint scores (n=42, 1 RCT, RR 2.33 CI 1.11 to 4.89, NNT 3 CI 2 to 10) compared with levomepromazine. Recipients given levomepromazine had a better BPRS endpoint score (n=38, 1 RCT, WMD -9.00, CI -17.46 to -0.54) and PANSS total score (n=38, 1 RCT, WMD -15.90, CI -30.30 to -1.50) than chlorpromazine. Risperidone recipients noticed a significant difference for the outcome 'at least 20% reduction' on BPRS endpoint score (n=42, 1 RCT, RR 3.33 CI 1.07 to 10.42, NNT 3 CI 2 to 14) compared with levomepromazine. Levomepromazine caused less tremor (n=41, 1 RCT RR 0.12 CI 0.02 to 0.87 NNTB 3 CI 2 to 8), less antiparkinsonian medication administration (n=79, 2 RCTs, RR 0.39 CI 0.17 to 0.90, NNTB 5, CI 2 to 21) compared with haloperidol. Levomepromazine caused less akathisia compared with chlorpromazine, but more hypotension compared with risperidone (n=42, 1 RCT, RR 2.50 CI 1.21 to 5.18, NNTH 3, CI 2 to 7). Dizziness was common with levomepromazine compared with other antipsychotic medications.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Available data does not enable us to confidently comment on the effectiveness of levomepromazine for schizophrenia. Larger, more robust, studies comparing levomepromazine with other antipsychotics including clozapine are much needed.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Chlorpromazine; Humans; Methotrimeprazine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risperidone; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 20927765
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007779.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2010Eclampsia, the occurrence of a seizure in association with pre-eclampsia, is a rare but serious complication of pregnancy. A number of different anticonvulsants have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Eclampsia, the occurrence of a seizure in association with pre-eclampsia, is a rare but serious complication of pregnancy. A number of different anticonvulsants have been used to control eclamptic fits and to prevent further seizures.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to assess the effects of magnesium sulphate compared with lytic cocktail (usually chlorpromazine, promethazine and pethidine) when used for the care of women with eclampsia. Magnesium sulphate is compared with diazepam and with phenytoin in other Cochrane reviews.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (July 2010) and the Cochrane Central Register of Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials comparing magnesium sulphate (intravenous or intramuscular administration) with lytic cocktail for women with a clinical diagnosis of eclampsia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (L Duley and D Chou) assessed trial quality and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three small trials (total 397 women) of average quality in the review. Magnesium sulphate was associated with fewer maternal deaths (risk ratio (RR) 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.59; 3 trials, 397 women) and was better at preventing further seizures (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.12; 3 trials, 397 women) than lytic cocktail. Magnesium sulphate was also associated with less respiratory depression (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.91; 2 trials, 198 women), less coma (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.74; 1 trial, 108 women), and less pneumonia (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.67; 2 trials, 307 women). There was no clear difference in the RR for any death of the baby (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.38, random effects; 2 trials, 177 babies).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Magnesium sulphate, rather than lytic cocktail, for women with eclampsia reduces the RR of maternal death, of further seizures and of serious maternal morbidity (respiratory depression, coma, pneumonia). Magnesium sulphate is the anticonvulsant of choice for women with eclampsia; the use of lytic cocktail should be abandoned.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Chlorpromazine; Drug Combinations; Eclampsia; Female; Humans; Magnesium Sulfate; Meperidine; Pregnancy; Promethazine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 20824833
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002960.pub2 -
Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria (Sao... Sep 2009Rapid and safe tranquillisation is sometimes unavoidable. We conducted this systematic review to determine the value of the combination haloperidol plus promethazine,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Rapid and safe tranquillisation is sometimes unavoidable. We conducted this systematic review to determine the value of the combination haloperidol plus promethazine, frequently used in Brazil.
METHOD
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register and included all randomised clinical trials involving aggressive people with psychosis for which haloperidol plus promethazine was being used. We reliably selected, quality assessed and extracted data from all relevant studies.
RESULTS
We identified four relevant high quality studies. The combination haloperidol plus promethazine mix was compared with midazolam, lorazepam, haloperidol alone and olanzapine Intramuscular. In Brazil, haloperidol plus promethazine was effective with over 2/3 of people being tranquil by 30 minutes, but midazolam was more swift and in India, compared with lorazepam, the combination was more effective. Over the next few hours reported differences are negligible. Haloperidol given without promethazine in this situation causes frequent serious adverse effects. Olanzapine is as rapidly tranquillising as haloperidol plus promethazine, but did not have an enduring effect and more people needed additional drugs within 4 hours.
CONCLUSION
All treatments evaluated are effective, but this review provides compelling evidence as to clear advantages of the haloperidol plus promethazine combination.
Topics: Anti-Anxiety Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Benzodiazepines; Drug Therapy, Combination; Haloperidol; Humans; Lorazepam; Midazolam; Olanzapine; Promethazine; Psychomotor Agitation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 19784494
DOI: 10.1590/s1516-44462009000300014 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2009Nausea and vomiting occur in 40-70% of people with cancer, and are also common in other chronic conditions such as hepatitis C and inflammatory bowel disease. Nausea and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Nausea and vomiting occur in 40-70% of people with cancer, and are also common in other chronic conditions such as hepatitis C and inflammatory bowel disease. Nausea and vomiting become more common as disease progresses.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments for nausea and vomiting occurring either as a result of the disease or its treatment, in adults with cancer? What are the effects of treatments for nausea and vomiting occurring either as a result of the disease or its treatment, in adults with chronic diseases other than cancer? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 2008 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found nine systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: 5HT(3) antagonists, antihistamines, antimuscarinics, atypical antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, butyrophenones, cannabinoids, corticosteroids, haloperidol, metoclopramide, NK1 antagonists, phenothiazines, prokinetics, 5HT(3) antagonists plus corticosteroids, and venting gastrostomy.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antiemetics; Chronic Disease; Crohn Disease; Humans; Nausea; Neoplasms; Vomiting
PubMed: 19445763
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jun 2009More than half of pregnant women suffer from nausea and vomiting, which typically begins by the 4th week and disappears by the 16th week of pregnancy. The cause of... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
More than half of pregnant women suffer from nausea and vomiting, which typically begins by the 4th week and disappears by the 16th week of pregnancy. The cause of nausea and vomiting in pregnancy is unknown, but may be due to the rise in human chorionic gonadotrophin concentration. In 1 in 200 women, the condition progresses to hyperemesis gravidarum, which is characterised by prolonged and severe nausea and vomiting, dehydration, and weight loss.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatment for nausea and vomiting in early pregnancy? What are the effects of treatments for hyperemesis gravidarum? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2008 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 30 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: acupressure; acupuncture; antihistamines; corticosteroids; corticotrophins; diazepam; dietary interventions other than ginger; domperidone; ginger; metoclopramide; ondansetron; phenothiazines; and pyridoxine (vitamin B6).
Topics: Acupressure; Administration, Oral; Domperidone; Female; Humans; Metoclopramide; Nausea; Phytotherapy; Pregnancy; Single-Blind Method; United States Food and Drug Administration; Vomiting
PubMed: 21726485
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jul 2009Delirium is common in the last weeks of life, occurring in 26% to 44% of people with advanced cancer in hospital, and in up to 88% of people with terminal illness in the... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Delirium is common in the last weeks of life, occurring in 26% to 44% of people with advanced cancer in hospital, and in up to 88% of people with terminal illness in the last days of life.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of interventions at the end of life in people with delirium caused by underlying terminal illness? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to February 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found three systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: artificial hydration; barbiturates; benzodiazepines; haloperidol; opioid switching; phenothiazines; and propofol.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Antipsychotic Agents; Barbiturates; Delirium; Haloperidol; Humans; Incidence; Neoplasms; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 21696645
DOI: No ID Found -
Schizophrenia Bulletin Mar 2009In patients with schizophrenia who do not have an optimal response to clozapine, it remains unclear if there is an evidence base to support a second antipsychotic in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
In patients with schizophrenia who do not have an optimal response to clozapine, it remains unclear if there is an evidence base to support a second antipsychotic in combination with clozapine. The present systematic review was therefore carried out to determine the efficacy of various clozapine combination strategies with antipsychotics. Relevant studies were located by searching the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register, Medline, and Embase (up to November 2007). Only studies randomly allocating patients to clozapine plus another antipsychotic vs clozapine monotherapy were included. The search yielded 21 studies suitable for reanalysis. In 3 trials, clozapine was combined with a phenothiazine, in 8 trials with a benzamide, and in the remaining trials with risperidone. While the majority of randomized trials were not double blind, 6 studies were double-blind placebo-controlled trials. A total of 14 randomized open studies significantly favored clozapine combination strategy in terms of mean difference (random effect standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.14 to -0.46); however, data extracted from 6 randomized double-blind studies did not show a statistically significant positive effect of this combination strategy in terms of mean difference (SMD = -0.12, 95% CI = -0.57 to 0.32). In terms of percentage of patients failing to show an improvement, a total of 10 randomized open studies significantly favored clozapine combination strategy (random effect relative risk [RR] = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.42 to 0.97), but data extracted from 6 randomized double-blind studies did not show a statistically significant positive effect of this combination strategy (RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.75 to 1.11). We conclude that the evidence base supporting a second antipsychotic in addition to clozapine in partially responsive patients with schizophrenia is weak. This weak evidence indicates modest to absent benefit.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Clozapine; Databases as Topic; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia; Schizophrenic Psychology; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 18436527
DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbn030 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2007Thioridazine is an antipsychotic that can still be used for schizophrenia although it is associated with the cardiac arrhythmia, torsades de pointe. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Thioridazine is an antipsychotic that can still be used for schizophrenia although it is associated with the cardiac arrhythmia, torsades de pointe.
OBJECTIVES
To review the effects of thioridazine for people with schizophrenia.
SEARCH STRATEGY
For this 2006 update, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (June 2006).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised clinical trials comparing thioridazine with other treatments for people with schizophrenia or other psychoses.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We reliably selected, quality rated and extracted data from relevant studies. For dichotomous data, we estimated relative risks (RR), with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where possible, we calculated the number needed to treat/harm statistic (NNT/H) on an intention-to-treat basis.
MAIN RESULTS
This review currently includes 42 RCTs with 3498 participants. When thioridazine was compared with placebo (total n=668, 14 RCTs) we found global state outcomes favoured thioridazine (n=105, 3 RCTs, RR 'no change or worse' by 6 months 0.33 CI 0.2 to 0.5, NNT of 2 CI 2 to 3). Thioridazine is sedating (n=324, 3 RCTs, RR 5.37 CI 3.2 to 9.1, NNH 4 CI 2 to 74). Generally, thioridazine did not cause more movement disorders than placebo.Twenty-seven studies (total n=2598) compared thioridazine with typical antipsychotics. We found no significant difference in global state (n=743, 11 RCTs, RR no short-term change or worse 0.98 CI 0.8 to 1.2) and medium-term assessments (n=142, 3 RCTs, RR 0.99, CI 0.6 to 1.6). We found no significant differences in the number of people leaving the study early 'for any reason' (short-term, n=1587, 19 RCTs, RR 1.07 CI 0.9 to 1.3). Extrapyramidal adverse events lower for those allocated to thioridazine (n=1082, 7 RCTs, RR use of antiparkinsonian drugs 0.45 CI 0.4 to 0.6). Thioridazine did seem associated with cardiac adverse effects (n=74, 1 RCT, RR 'any cardiovascular adverse event' 3.17 CI 1.4 to 7.0, NNH 3 CI 2 to 5). Electrocardiogram changes were significantly more frequent in the thioridazine group (n=254, 2 RCTs, RR 2.38, CI 1.6 to 3.6, NNH 4 CI 3 to 10). Six RCTs (total n=344) randomised thioridazine against atypical antipsychotics. Global state rating did not reveal any short-term difference between thioridazine and remoxipride and sulpiride (n=203, RR not improved or worse 1.00 CI 0.8 to 1.3). Limited data did not highlight differences in adverse event profiles.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although there are shortcomings, there appears to be enough consistency over different outcomes and periods to confirm that thioridazine is an antipsychotic of similar efficacy to other commonly used antipsychotics for people with schizophrenia. Its adverse events profile is similar to that of other drugs, but it may have a lower level of extrapyramidal problems and higher level of ECG changes. We would advocate the use of alternative drugs, but if its use in unavoidable, cardiac monitoring is justified.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia; Thioridazine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 17636691
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001944.pub2