HALOPERIDOL vs PLACEBO/NIL: Repeated need for tranquillisation ‐ needing additional injections during 24 hours
HALOPERIDOL may leads to lower repeated need for tranquillisation needing additional injection… compared with PLACEBO/NIL (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
HALOPERIDOL vs PLACEBO/NIL Repeated need for tranquillisation needing additional injection within 24 hours · patients with psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation HALOPERIDOL may leads to lower repeated need for tranquillisation needing additional injection… compared with PLACEBO/NIL (low certainty). Haloperidol for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation) (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.51 [0.42, 0.62] | 4 studies · 660 participants | Low |
HALOPERIDOL vs PLACEBO/NIL Repeated need for tranquillisation needing additional injection during 24 hours · patients with psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation HALOPERIDOL may leads to lower repeated need for tranquillisation needing additional injection… compared with PLACEBO/NIL (low certainty). Haloperidol for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation) (2012) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD009377.PUB2, superseded | RR 0.51 [0.42, 0.62] | 4 studies · 660 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Haloperidol for psychosis‐induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation) 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.