ABSTRACT
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To investigate prescribing patterns for antipsychotic regimens based on intramuscular haloperidol or intramuscular olanzapine for treating acute agitation; to compare the costs of each drug regimen, which included adjunctive anxiolytics and/or anticholinergics; and to compare the effectiveness and safety of each drug regimen. DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review. SETTING: State psychiatric facility. PATIENTS: Twenty-seven patients who received intramuscular haloperidol to treat 47 episodes of acute agitation and 26 patients who received intramuscular olanzapine to treat 38 episodes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data from patients receiving the antipsychotic regimens between August 2004 and March 2007 were reviewed. Mean +/- SD doses were 6.4 +/- 2.4 mg (range 2.5-10 mg) for haloperidol and 8.1 +/- 2.3 mg (range 5-10 mg) for olanzapine. The mean +/- SD cost of treating an episode of agitation with haloperidol was significantly lower at $4.06 +/- 3.98 (range $1.74-18.35) versus $27.84 +/- 10.40 (range $21.58-52.46) for olanzapine (p<0.0001). Significantly fewer patients who received haloperidol than patients who received olanzapine required additional pharmacotherapy to manage agitation (41% vs 69%, chi(2)=4.34, p=0.04). No significant differences were found between groups in the mean number of repeat doses of psychotropic drugs needed/episode (0.6 [range 0-5] for haloperidol vs 0.8 [range 0-3] for olanzapine, p=0.47), in the percentages of patients who required seclusion and/or restraints (59% for haloperidol vs 58% for olanzapine, chi(2)=0.01, p=0.91), or in time spent in seclusion and/or restraints (3.7 +/- 7.1 for haloperidol vs 3.6 +/- 6.5 hrs for olanzapine, p=0.92). No adverse events were documented with either drug. CONCLUSION: For the treatment of acute episodes of agitation, regimens based on intramuscular haloperidol were significantly less expensive than and at least as effective as those based on intramuscular olanzapine.
