SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2004
Valproic acid for agitation in dementia.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond epilepsy: The expanding role of valproic acid in Alzheimer disease therapy - a review.The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2025Review
- Anticonvulsants for behavioral and psychological symptoms in dementia: protocol for a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2019Article
- Review
- Packages of care for dementia in low- and middle-income countries.PLoS medicine · 2009Review
- Anticonvulsants in the treatment of aggression in the demented elderly: an update.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2009Article
- Management of agitation and aggression associated with Alzheimer disease.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2009Review
- Neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer disease and related disorders: why do treatments work in clinical practice but not in the randomized trials?The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry · 2008Article
- Alternatives to atypical antipsychotics for the management of dementia-related agitation.Drugs & aging · 2008Review
- Effectiveness of atypical antipsychotic drugs in patients with Alzheimer's disease.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2007Article
- Divalproex sodium for the treatment of behavioural problems associated with dementia in the elderly.Drugs & aging · 2006Review
- Psychiatric and behavioral symptoms in Alzheimer's disease and other dementias: etiology and management.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2005Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAgitation affects up to 70% of older people with dementia. Valproic acid has been used for the past 10 years to control agitation in dementia, but no systematic review of the effectiveness of this drug has been published to date. The current study examines three randomized, placebo-controlled trials of the effect of valproic acid on older people with dementia who were agitated.
objectivesTo determine whether evidence supports the use of valproic acid in the treatment of agitation of people with dementia. SEARCH STRATEGY: Trials were identified from a last updated search of the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group on 10 July 2003 using the terms ("agitat*" or "distur*" or "behavi*" or "aggress*") and "valproic" or "valproate" or "divalpro*." This Register contains articles from all major health care databases and many ongoing trials databases and is regularly updated. The reviewers contacted the authors of publications and drug companies manufacturing valproic acid for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized, placebo-controlled trials with concealed allocation where agitation and dementia of participants were assessed DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: 1. Two reviewers extracted data from published trials. 2. Odds ratios of average differences were calculated. 3. Only "intention to treat" analyses were included. 4. Analysis compared participants treated with valproic acid with controls. MAIN
resultsMeta-analysis of the pooled results of the included trials could not be performed because of the following problems. In Porsteinsson 2001, although the physicians having direct responsibility for patient care were blinded, a non-blinded physician, who had no direct contact with these physicians, adjusted divalproex sodium dosage on the basis of reports from blinded raters. Therefore, because the physician who controlled therapy knew which patients were receiving divalproex, the trial did not satisfy the criterion of concealed allocation. In Tariot 2001, 54% of the treated patients dropped out compared with 29% of control patients. Of all treated patients, 22% dropped out because of adverse effects, and the study had to be discontinued prematurely. The third trial (Sival 2002) had a cross-over design. No results from the first phase of the study were available, and although the statistical section stated, "the t-test for independent samples is used to analyze the two-period cross-over trial", because the samples were not independent - they are the same patients in the treatment and placebo groups - a question must be raised about the correctness of the analyses. The type of valproate used in the trials varied - one used short-acting sodium valproate, one long-acting divalproex sodium, and the third early-onset acting divalproex sodium. Average doses differed (480mg/d - 1000mg/d), as did duration of therapy (3 wks - 6 wks), and ways of evaluating patients and their response to therapy. A limited meta-analysis, pooling the results concerning adverse effects (Porsteinsson 2001, Tariot 2001) revealed the following: Sedation occurred more frequently in patients treated with valproic acid than in controls Urinary tract infection was more common among patients treated with valproic acid than controls Because of differences in identifying adverse effects it was not possible to pool other observations concerning adverse effects between the two studies that were examined. REVIEWERS'
conclusionsThe trials reviewed should be regarded as preliminary. Individual reports suggest that low dose sodium valproate is ineffective in treating agitation among demented patients, and that high dose divalproex sodium is associated with an unacceptable rate of adverse effects. More research on the use of valproate preparations for agitation of people with dementia is needed. On the basis of current evidence, valproate preparations cannot be recommended for the treatment of agitation in dementia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.