Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32108325›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020

Benzodiazepines for treatment of patients with delirium excluding those who are cared for in an intensive care unit.

Yan Li, Jun Ma, Yinghui Jin, Nan Li, Rui Zheng, Wei Mu, Jiaying Wang, Jin Hua Si, Jing Chen, Hong Cai Shang

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Dementia Clinical Care in Relation to COVID-19.Current treatment options in neurology · 2022
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Yan LiBeijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Center for Anesthesiology, No.2 Anzhen Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, Beijing, China, 100029.
Jun MaBeijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Center for Anesthesiology, No.2 Anzhen Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, Beijing, China, 100029.
Yinghui JinTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nursing, #312 West Anshan Road, Tianjin, China.
Nan LiTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin Insititute of Clinical Evaluation, #88 Yuquan Road, Nankai District, Tianjin, Tianjin, China, 300193.
Rui ZhengTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin Insititute of Clinical Evaluation, #88 Yuquan Road, Nankai District, Tianjin, Tianjin, China, 300193.
Wei MuThe 2nd Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of traditional Chinese Medicine, Clinical pharmacology, 861 Zhenli Road, Hebei District, Tianjin, Tianjin, China, 300150.
Jiaying WangThe Affiliated Wuxi People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Rehabilitation and Acupuncture, No.299, Qingyang Road, Liangxi District, Wuxi, Jiangsu, China, 214000.
Jin Hua SiTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Library, #88 Yuquan Road, Nankai District, Tianjin, Tianjin, China, 300193.
Jing ChenTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Baokang Hospital, #88 Yuquan Road, Nankai District, Tianjin, Tianjin, China, 300193.
Hong Cai ShangDongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Key Laboratory of Chinese Internal Medicine of Ministry of Education, Haiyuncang Lane, Dongcheng District, Beijing, China, 100700.
Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNBaokang Hospital Affiliated to Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNBeijing Anzhen Hospital · CNBeijing University of Chinese Medicine · CNCapital Medical University · CNWuxi People's Hospital · CN

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDelirium is a very common condition associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and costs. Current critical care guidelines recommend first and foremost the use of nonpharmacological strategies in both the prevention and treatment of delirium. Pharmacological interventions may augment these approaches and they are currently used widely in clinical practice to manage the symptoms of delirium. Benzodiazepines are currently used in clinical practice to treat behavioural disturbances associated with delirium but current guidelines do not recommend their use for this indication. The use of these medicines is controversial because there is uncertainty about whether they are effective for patients or have the potential to harm them.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness and safety of benzodiazepines in the treatment of delirium (excluding delirium related to withdrawal from alcohol or benzodiazepines) in any healthcare settings other than intensive care units (ICU). SEARCH

methodsWe searched ALOIS: the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialized Register up to 10 April 2019. ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of a number of major healthcare databases (including MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS), numerous trial registries (including national, international and pharmaceutical registries), and grey literature sources. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in healthcare settings that ranged from nursing homes and long-term care facilities to any hospital setting except for ICUs, involving adult patients with delirium excluding those with delirium related to alcohol or benzodiazepine withdrawal. Included RCTs had to assess the effect of benzodiazepines, at any dose and given by any route, compared with placebo or another drug intended to treat delirium. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We decided whether or not to pool data on the basis of clinical heterogeneity between studies. We used GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methods to assess the quality of evidence. MAIN

resultsWe identified only two trials that satisfied the selection criteria. We did not pool the data because of the substantial clinical differences between the trials. In one trial, participants (n = 58) were patients in an acute palliative care unit with advanced cancer who had a mean age of 64 years. All of the participants had delirium, were treated with haloperidol, and were randomised to receive either lorazepam or placebo in combination with it. Due to very serious imprecision, all evidence was of low certainty. We were unable to determine whether there were clinically important differences in the severity of delirium (mean difference (MD) 2.10, 95% CI -0.96 to 5.16; n = 50), length of hospital admission (MD 0.00, 95% CI -3.45 to 3.45; n = 58), mortality from all causes (risk ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.02; participants = 58) or any of a number of adverse events. Important effects could not be confirmed or excluded. The study authors did not report the length of the delirium episode. In the other trial, participants (n = 30) were patients in general medical wards with acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) who had a mean age of 39.2 years. Investigators compared three drug treatments: all participants had delirium, and were randomised to receive lorazepam, chlorpromazine, or haloperidol. Very low-certainty evidence was identified, and we could not determine whether lorazepam differed from either of the other treatments in the effect on severity of delirium, any adverse event, or mortality from all causes. The study authors did not report the length of the delirium episode or the length of hospital admission. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is no enough evidence to determine whether benzodiazepines are effective when used to treat patients with delirium who are cared for in non-ICU settings. The available evidence does not support their routine use for this indication. Because of the scarcity of data from randomised controlled trials, further research is required to determine whether or not there is a role for benzodiazepines in the treatment of delirium in non-ICU settings.

Indexed as

Critical CarePalliative CareAntipsychotic AgentsBenzodiazepinesDeliriumHaloperidolHumansLorazepamRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntipsychotic AgentsBenzodiazepinesHaloperidolLorazepam

Identifiers

PMID32108325
PMCPMC7047222
OpenAlexW3007555352

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.