Oral transmucosal etomidate in volunteers.

BACKGROUND: The oral transmucosal route of delivery is now used for many drugs, including fentanyl and midazolam. Etomidate's pharmacokinetic profile and physiochemical properties suggest it may be suitable for transmucosal delivery. Transmucosal delivery might extend etomidate's use to sedation and anxiolysis. This is the first study in humans to examine the oral transmucosal administration of a novel etomidate dosage form. METHODS: Ten healthy adult volunteers consumed 12.5-mg, 25-mg, 50-mg, and 100-mg doses of oral transmucosal etomidate (OTET) on four different study days. Serum etomidate concentrations, sedation, respiratory and cardiovascular variables, taste, and side effects were determined. RESULTS: Five minutes after OTET administration, etomidate was detected in the venous blood. Mean peak concentrations occurred 20-30 min later and ranged from 61-174 ng/ml, related to the dose administered. Drowsiness and light sleep occurred in a dose-related manner 10-20 min after administration and lasted for 30-60 min. No episodes of SpO2 <90%, hypotension, or emesis occurred at any dose throughout the study. Nausea was rare. Two volunteers exhibited a brief episode of involuntary tremor after the 100-mg dose. The bitter taste of OTET was judged increasingly unpleasant with escalating doses. CONCLUSIONS: Oral transmucosal etomidate produces dose-related increases in sedation and clinically significant serum concentrations with minimal side effects. The time course of these effects suggests that OTET might be useful when brief mild to moderate sedation with rapid recovery is desirable. Further development of this novel dosage form is warranted.

Psychiatric and nonmedical decisions on commitment.

The civil commitment statutes of Oregon were changed in 1973 and 1975 to include nonphysician court examiners and public prosecutors in the commitment hearing. To evaluate the effect of these changes the authors compared the commitment decisions actually made by panels composed of two physicians with those made by panels with one physician and one nonphysician mental health professional. They also compared the commitment decisions made by six groups of medical and nonmedical people involved with the commitment process regarding five case vignettes. They found that decisions made by the nonmedical mental health professionals were not significantly different from those made by the psychiatric examiners.