Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2021
Association among rescue neuroleptic use, agitation, and perceived comfort: secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial on agitated delirium.
Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacological Treatment for Terminal Agitation, Delirium and Anxiety in Frail Older Patients.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Management of Physical Symptoms in Patients with Advanced Cancer during the Last Weeks and Days of Life.Cancer research and treatment · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFew studies have examined how the use of rescue medications could be used to inform on the efficacy of interventions in delirium clinical trials. The objective of this study was to determine the association among rescue medication use, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), and perceived comfort by the nurses and caregivers.
methodsThis was a pre-planned secondary analysis of a double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing the use of a single dose of lorazepam plus haloperidol versus placebo plus haloperidol in patients with agitated delirium. Rescue medications were considered the gold standard for this analysis. The optimal cutoff for RASS analysis was calculated by using general linear regression models and determining the area of the curve and using the top left approach. We used 2 × 2 tables to examine the association between rescue medication use and perceived comfort.
resultsFifty-eight patients received the study medications and 52 (89%) completed the 8-h observation period. There were 26 (50%) patients in each arm. The lorazepam/haloperidol arm required fewer rescue doses (4/26 (15%)) vs. 16/26 (62%), p = 0.004). Patients with a greater initial RASS reduction required fewer rescue doses. The cutoff value for RASS improvement was 4 points, area under the curve (AUC) 0.64 (95% CI 0.49-0.79) for those who required no rescue doses, and 3 points, AUC 0.74 (95% CI 0.52-0.96) for those who required more than one rescue dose.
conclusionsRescue medication use was responsive to change and associated with both RASS scores and perceived patient comfort by the nurse and caregiver.
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.